[Theory] Color Pie Discussion: Recent Activity
| [Theory] Color Pie Discussion: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics |
Recent updates to [Theory] Color Pie Discussion: (Generated at 2024-05-04 10:52:37)
Now that the topic is better circumscribed: Color fixing is something that green gets to have since it is correlated with mana generating abilities which are a green flagship ability, but in general it is something all colors should have access to.
It is fine to have color fixing on colored cards if it is tailored to the color no matter the color. And color fixing is one of the main abilities that you should have access to from a generic mana cost.
Color fixing is not any colors weakness.
I'm of the opinion that generic-cost artifacts should allow colors access to utility even outside their color pie at a significant upcost.
The problem occurs usually if the "significant upcost" part is ignored.
The goal here should be to always be able to say: A black deck would rather splash red to get access to artifact destruction than play the artifact solution if able.
It wasn't that much of an argument. It was more of a "What if?" Like, imagine if we didn't know the order in which the colors are listed in the color pie. You were told that there existed ally and enemy relations. Then you would be given a bunch of hybrids cards to determine which of the color pair relations are enemies and which are allies. Could one do it? I doubt it. So that could be another standpoint when it comes to restructuring the color pie (amplify ally relations). I might create a topic for that at some point...
Okay, so black drain spells. Let's say we have this card: Sanguine Helix
So a color has an effect that can be mimicked if one of its allies and of its enemies are combined. Isn't that nonsensical?
Also, how is "sacrifice power for knowledge" not blue? That's crazy, man. Hand size is many times determined by your capability to draw cards so mechanically it's
-related as well.
> How often do you want this effect at all? Life gain per se is already incredibly narrow.
Eh, Idk. That's the thing I'm thinking of as well. However, it's not like all the effects in the color pie exists because they are especially required.
name change
@SecretInfiltrator
I was about name this "colorless artifacts..." but the name was is already long. Eh, I'll change by cutting it from the end.
Colorful artifacts and colorless spells are niche themes and artifacts are defined by their lack of color so I would assume most would presume this to relate to colorless cards.
Lands have always functioned as your way to get mana so any "color fixing" on them is justified to some part at least. However, I still wouldn't put a vindicate on a land with colorless activation cost though. Schemes don't even fit into "normal" MTG play so they aren't relevant.
@Mal:
Good synopsis.
> So a non-
deck getting access to Shock or Lightning Strike i.e. Flamecast Wheel doesn't bother me, but it shouldn't get access to Explosive Impact.
You mean Flame Javelin? xD
Your last paragraph is something that's argued over. Ie. from MaRo's perspective Hornet Sting is a mistake since color pie identity isn't about power level and hence,
shouldn't get access to burn even if it "pays premium" for the effect. It doesn't take a huge leap of logic to see the contradiction with this statement regarding how artifacts (colorless cards) currently function. IMO it's quite blatant and so far the reasonings have sounded like weak excuses. These two ideologues are hardly compatible.
Color fixing is different from ramp. I'm fine with colorless getting the lion's share of color fixing, because color fixing needs to be in colorless in order to make non-green multicolor decks on par with green multicolor ones.
As for ramp, the most egregious of the issues comes from cards like Sol Ring and the Moxes; most of the heavy colorless ramp is from that era. Colorless rarely gets 1-mana ramp and, at best, gets 2 mana ramp that is usually significantly worse than Green's ramp - compare Wayfarer's Bauble, which is arguably one of the best early colorless ramp spells printed originally in the modern frame, to Rampant Growth or Farseek - 3 total mana invested vs. 2. Sylvan Scrying and Expedition Map highlights this discrepancy as well, with both being roughly on the same power level. In order to enable multicolor deckbuilding, either all but one color should have access to fixing, or it should be relegated to colorless.
As for covering each color's weakness, there's obviously a limit. You mentioned this on the other thread, but Staff of Nin is definitely on the stronger side because of that, and there are certain (strong) artifacts that are pretty much autoincludes in every EDH deck that remotely wants them. There's definitely an upper limit for the power of the effects that artifacts should have access to in order to shore up weaknesses, but I don't feel like they should be limited to anything particularly. When a set leans towards a specific color - for example, Innistrad and
(Grimoire of the Dead), or Zendikar and 
(Explorer's Scope) - the artifacts are naturally going to expand their pool of abilities to have access to effects naturally of that color, to give the world a specific feel to it. The important part is limiting that so you can capture the feel of a world that feels more 
or 
than others, but still retain the strengths and weaknesses of each color within it. So a non-
deck getting access to Shock or Lightning Strike i.e. Flamecast Wheel doesn't bother me, but it shouldn't get access to Explosive Impact.
To address your 2nd point's 3rd question regarding colorless having access to an effect that a color specifically can't do, I also think it's fine. It's not that Black can't destroy artifacts - it's that black can't destroy artifacts via paying black mana for it, so it has to pay a premium for the effect. In artifacts, there are no cards that straight up say "destroy target artifact" that don't cost colored mana, and many of the "Destroy target permanent" effects cost 7 mana (aside from Lux Cannon, which has 3 turns of investment attached to a 4 mana artifact). So, sure, you can make a
or a 
burn deck, but you're probably not going to be as mana efficient as a 
burn deck due to how many artifacts you're running to shore up your lack of Hornet Sting and Psionic Blast effects. Color pie identity isn't necessarily about what a color can and can't do - it's about what a color is good at and what it's bad at. If you want a color to do something it's bad at, expect bad expensive results. The reasoning is the same behind tertiary effects in the color pie - Green has tertiary access to haste, but don't expect to make a deck full of good hasty beaters in 
without dipping into 
for it.
I actually prefer "convert other colors to
" in 
more than "convert other colors to 
", especially because that Red gets firebreathing and a couple other 
-intensive abilities and spells. Soulbright Flamekin is probably one of my favorite designs just because he generates and "fixes" mana in a very red way. I'm also okay with partial/complete payback like on Coal Stoker or Akki Rockspeaker.
I like red generating mana more than just fixing it, i. e. I don't want tred to have permanent ramp, but cheating the curve with a Wild Cantor seems like the way to go.
Pure fixing seems not to represent red's MO.
EDIT: Of your precedent almost everything with the exception of the hybrid Manamorphose falls into the category of mana storage and explosive ramp, where the deal actually can enable you to cheat the curve.
Though I probably like Burning-Tree Emissary more I think partial/complete payback is fine as a mechanic in red.
Do you mean artifacts or colorless artifacts? Should this talk only about artifacts or also colorless nonartifact spells? What about colorless cards that cannot be spells e. g. lands? What about schemes?
Red and white are primary in first strike their allies should be secondary in it? Is that the level of argument we are getting here, because that's not what allied and enemy status should be about - even if you care about these labels beyond having a decriptor of color relations.
Black has lifelink because black has drain spells and hence probably the best claim on that keyword for all colors, because one of the two ways black gets to gain resources is through parasitism: I gain by making others lose. Arguably this stealing of resources is even more definitely black than "power at a cost"/"deal with the devil" kind of effects since those overlap with red's shortsightedness.
The flavor of Ivory Tower is not blue. It's not "you have life gain, because life gain is how we represent knowledge", but "we want to reward your behavior, so have a cookie for behaving like you are supposed to", which seems more white. Both of these artifacts flavorwise hint at something white-blue (Venser's color identity in the set the artifact is from IIRC).
How often do you want this effect at all? Life gain per se is already incredibly narrow.
Should they though? That could increase mechanical structure (juxtaposition of colors) within color pie, couldn't?
Pretty much each color has access to stalling stuff. For example,
can do mass creature removal - something that blue can only dream of.
Regarding #4: I don't see why allies should be able to have tertiary access to something just because one color is primary in it. It's a common theme among a lot of mechanics, but I don't see it as a rule or guideline for bleed. Blue rarely pays life for things, but black does. Red's allies do not get rummaging/looting - that's more closely linked with Blue. Personally I feel like
has a better claim in lifegain than 
does.
already has enough tools to stall opponents - no need to add lifegain to that list.
1-drop mana dorks aren't gonna be (re)printed in standard anymore. Caryatid requires
: if I have a multicolored deck I might not have 
available (even if one of the deck's colors is 
). I'm likely to have 
though. Also, prophetic is pretty hard to remove.
I find it interesting that you think that Prophetic Prism is better than any green options. I think you might be overestimating the power level of the prism; or maybe I'm underestimating it. I see it as weaker than (and not very comparable to) Birds of Paradise and Sylvan Caryatid. After all, it's not growth, it's fixing.
Premise
Notes
Discussion about this has come up in various places. See "Red: Color Fixing" for example.
Color fixing is something that I've brought up multiple times. Prophetic Prism is wayyy better than anything
can get, especially since were aren't going to see Birds of Paradise reprint in standard any time soon. This is also pronounced by the fact that when you want color fixing, you aren't sure what colors you have available, so a colorless fixing source is just better than one that requires a specific color to use.
What I meant though was that I don't like that colorless can do better a thing than a color weak that's weak in that thing. So I just didn't mean that better than "any" color - specifically better than "a" color.
I think you're right about new topic. I'll think I change the set name as well.
EDIT: Added "Colorless Spells: Their role" (details to come later).
This is very good as it's much easier to comment on.
1) I'm seeing a theme with my way of thinking since this came up in the other topics as well: I seemingly prefer for an ability to only have a single color that absolutely can't do it. Defined by negation I guess.
could get damage prevention? Its creatures certainly do it from time to time (ie. Fog Bank). Energy Field is an interesting, yet flawed, design... Also, I originally conceived Walking the Edge as a mono-
card.
shouldn't its allies 
and 
have at least some access to it? Also, why does 
have lifegain again? It's flavored as draining yes, but what life gain does is make you healthy - even over your starting life total. 
is a bit questionable there... Maybe: "(((Black: Temporal Life)))"?
decks - much more so than in non-
decks. However, I don't think I would be comfortable with a blue enchantment having this ability as a repeatable effect so maybe that point is null.
2) Could this also mean that
3) This is a good point. However, since this effect is tied to hand size, it has this "Mind Over Matter" vibe going for it that could justify it regardless I think.
4) Fair enough. Still, if lifegain is centered on
5) Hmmm, hard to say. This would be a quite confined ability so I'm not sure how many various things you could do it without pushing it too much. I mean, I like playing Ivory Tower and Venser's Journal a lot in my
What does colorless do that the colors don't do better?
Actually, we should make a separate place to discuss the role of artifacts in the color pie. It's really become an issue that deserves its own discussion.
Well, the entirely of the color pie is, of course, arbitrary, so there's no one perfect, right answer for why it feels wrong. What follows are the reasons that spring to mind for me:
• Three colors are already capable of providing life gain, with a variety of different triggers. If blue was allowed to gain life, red would be the only color incapable of it.
• Blue's focus is generally on preventing and delaying harm rather than recovering from it. This is reflected in it's counter spells, tap effects, and bounce.
• Blue's focus, more than any of the other colors, is on the mind rather than the body.
• I don't believe that blue and white need more mechanical overlap.
• Blue already plays the tempo game through other means. I don't think adding life gain to blue's suite is beneficial to gameplay.
I could probably think of more, but I'm very tired.
I still think that colorless discussion is relevant here if we think of this as not being "necessary" if artifacts already do it. On the other hand, why does even
do it if artifacts do it quite well, maybe even better, than 
does?
IMO there's serious dichotomy within the color pie "doctrine" in that you can't use (high) mana costs to justify bleeds in colors, yet you can use it in when colorless is concerned. Either color pie is not affected by power levels or it is (ie. the distinctions between design & development): MaRo (and others at WotC) should really pick their minds about this one. As I have stated before, color pie is fundamentally about colors and how they play distinctly - IMO the use of colorless has gone way beyond of its original purpose and is now hindering the validity of whole concept of colors - with circumnavigating the weaknesses of the colors and in many cases doing what the colors do but better.
PS: Staff of Nin is disgusting. I basically slap it into all of my EDH decks regardless of color and never end up regretting it.
These are here to be questioned: "discussion" is in the name after all.
Thinking in terms of "necessity" it becomes pretty hard to justify anything the colors do really IMO.
While you might be right about this not being "appropriate" could you articulate a particular reason for that?
Added Truce as "Precedent".
Some of your ideas for shifts I question, but I really don't find this one appropriate or necessary at all.
@Link:
Yes, but I specified that
has too many effects to which it holds monopoly on. Ie. effects that have no real secondary or tertiary color contenders. There are also some effects I would move out entirely from the color so giving something little as "compensation" there and there is reasonable.
@SecretInfiltrator:
life gain is in a strange place where pretty much everything the color does (including card draw) is related or requires creatures. Somehow life gain doesn't match to that at all though. Actuality, it's like the opposite: 
is the one with the lifelink dudes which is pretty weird considering. Also the flavor of 
lifelink is questionable IMO: in 
as a parasite/leech flavor it makes sense, but in 
... While 
lifelink is something I've played with I haven't found it satisfactory enough. That's another topic though.
I was indeed referring to the flavor of the two artifacts: I listed that statement under "Flavor" header.
I assume he's talking about the flavour of both, which are very blue. Venser is a primarily blue character (secondarily white), and just read Ivory Tower's flavour text.
Colourless does have access to almost everything (even forced discard - from Disrupting Scepter to Fell Flagship). But usually it should be at a higher price than coloured cards within the colours that have access to those effects. You wouldn't get a blue-red deck playing Staff of Nin, but white decks like it for the card draw and green decks like it for the burn. You wouldn't get a white-blue deck playing Neurok Hoversail, but I could see an occasional red-green deck playing it. And so on. Artifacts (and colourless) are there to partially and inefficiently shore up the colours' weaknesses.
And back on topic, I do like the proposal to have more colour-wash in red as an expression of artistry. I loved Smokebraider back in the day, and I'm sure I've made use of similar concepts in some of my custom sets.
I'm in particular agreement with Sophic Centaur - life gain and card draw are green, this mechanic is following both. Flawowise Gerrard's Wisdom and Presence of the Wise fit very well with green, which is the color of wisdom/intuition over blue's smarts/knowledge.
What is the idea of putting this scaled life gain into blue.
What do you mean with your reference to Ivory Tower and Venser's Jounal. Both cards are colorless, so how are they indicative of blue?
Didn't you mention in a comment somewhere that you felt that blue already had too much of the pie within it's ability set? Why do you feel that blue needs access to life gain?