Frontier World: Recent Activity
Frontier World: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
Mechanics | Skeleton | Hover and Orbital | World | Templating Guidelines |
Recent updates to Frontier World: (Generated at 2024-05-19 15:59:06)
See details page for summary of Orbital.
Note, orbital is deliberately costs more than flying, cheap fliers are replaced by hover.
In general, I'd prefer to avoid "target player's library" since it can leave people unsure whether to use it on themselves or the opponent, and manipulating opponent's libraries can be really frustrating if it happens repeatedly, but I remember hearing that most of the time people use it on themselves, and only on the opponent when they have a specific reason.
This is basically Mogg Fanatic but with "fight" terminology. Except that it can ping 0/1 creatures for free and is very versatile if you can boost its power or toughness.
ROFL. Yeah, that's pretty good.
Whoever reveals the cheapest nonland card. That way, each player wants to cast the biggest thing possible, but they have to guess how big the other players are going to try and be smaller than that.
Good point, any "play for free" is going to have similar problems. Any better suggestions for something that would work in a similar way? Something like choosing a card from the top N of the library?
Right now you just use this to cheat out Emrakul, and still get the extra turn. The only things that'll stop you are counterspells, Draco, or a tie with Autochthon Wurm (and it's unlikely that the opponent will use the latter two without a reason to build around them). Since the most mana-intensive effects are usually also the swingiest in terms of Win Probability (at least once you clear the hurdle of casting and resolving them), this effect simply doesn't balance well.
Playing into the poker and high noon shootout tropes of the wild west.
I'm not sure what this needs to cost to be balanced. I'm also not sure if it's fair that everyone else discards the cards, as that's a double-hit. But if you don't do that, there's no tension as everyone just plays their biggest card and hopes for the best.
Why not just make it an Aurochs Stampede and say that aurochs are the natives' version of cattle/bison?
For the "shot in the back" trope I wanted a flavour of a fairly hefty burn spell. I went back and forth over lots of iterations: basically anything that can deal four or five damage is pretty good in limited. But there's a big gap between Flame Slash and Chandra's Outrage.
And then I decided to make it modal even though I originally didn't intend to, because it lets it often do four damage, but has a flavour of "always good, but deadly when someone lets their guard down". And appropriately vigilant creatures don't let their guard down :)
If I could 'Like' your last comment, Jack, I would have done it already. :)
I think the magic creature types are actually surprisingly good. Most of the time they sensibly group together similar-enough things into groups large enough to count for tribal, and I can't imagine a lot better way of doing it. Eg. "birds" is about right, even though some mammals and reptiles get their own creature type.
But it's undeniable some odd decisions still perpetuate like having "ox".
I sometimes lament they don't have a way of grouping together creature types into a hierarchy, so all the aquatic creature types have "aquatic" in small print somewhere. That would allow sensible cards like "destroy target undead creature". And it wouldn't be much cognitive load, because 90% of the time, it's obvious which creature types count as aquatic, and if you're not sure, you should be able to look at the card more closely. (In standard -- in casual you'd not care unless you built a deck round the concept.) But it's probably too late to change now, there's too many odd cases where creature types cover non-overlapping concepts, like "destroy target undead creature" would look like it should hit HALF of spirits, or some beasts are aquatic and some aren't.