So Ling 素靈: Comments

I can't decide if I want Channel or Cycling with a trigger. Of course cycling is stronger because it replaces itself. On the flip side, Channel sounds more flavorful. Although, I want to see a GUR combo deck that cycles through the whole deck.

Cycling it is.

Renamed set to match the plane So Ling 素靈. The war is still called Coi Zin 彩戰: War of the Colors.

Out of curiosity, do you actually speak Chinese, or are you just using something like Google Translate to come up with all of your Chinese names?

cantonese to be precise, so i doubt you can use google to spit out jyutping. not to mention google and other online translators are pathetic at translating asian languages to western languages.

Would you play a deck with nothing but split cards?

Elements notes:
General division: =metal, earth, =gas, liquid, transparent, =solid, organic

Unused elements: Lithium: R/g Beryllium: G/r Boron: G Aluminum: R

Should I make some colorless Thrulls? actually colorless Spirits are more likely.

Looking back at the progress of this set's concept, I have to admit it was quite successful. A 3-color faction vs 2.5-color faction where each side has excellent flavor and design space.

That said, can the same concept applied to a different color combination be as successful? The 3-color faction can be arc or wedge, and the remaining two colors automatically side with artifacts. Which other color combinations would fare best for this concept? Odyssey block, specifically Torment and Judgment, sort of played out vs . But not quite to the extent I went with So Ling.

At a glance, reviewing both So Ling and Torment & Judgment, I think wedge vs enemy pair should work better than arc vs ally pair. The main issue is that the 2-color faction has to have enough diversity. Ally pairs tend to have less diversity because too much of their color pies overlap. But if I were to choose such an ally pair, then probably would be most interesting.

Now which wedge vs enemy pair would be most interesting, besides those already used in So Ling?
­ seems war-torn vs isolationist.
­ focus on graveyard vs artifact and spells.
­ control vs attrition.
­ permanent counters vs instant change.

Now wedges in general haven't been shown much in official cards. So looking at this list, I'd say is one of the least popular and least understood. So an adventurous designer could try that route. OTOH is a very popular enemy pair with many established decks in every archetype (i.e. aggro, control, midrange, combo), so that would also appease Golgari and Rock fans. However, instead of artifacts, it would interact more with lands. So with favoring artifacts to some degree, it turns into 3.25 vs 2.5, which is still pretty fair given 's long history. Also, instead of split cards, would be cool with double-faced cards, given that the only DFC planeswalker is from that combination. Most of the work would be to establish an identity for .

I could see versus . White-blue often loves artifacts, and Jund has a fairly solid identity that's quite opposed to white-blue.

I think if you're going to be putting against , it'd be much more natural to make the artifacts affiliated with , leaving white to go with . The Izzet were the most artifact-loving of Ravnica's guilds, and a red-blue faction with a focus on spells and artifacts could naturally lean towards artifacts to provide most of their decent-sized creatures. (OTOH I'm not sure if that'd work in limited, since the / etc players could snap up the artifacts too.) doesn't have to focus on the graveyard: they're also the colours that do lifegain, regeneration, and the most spiritual colours.

we've seen too much Azorius vs Jund already, in almost every standard ever (or so it seems). so I'm not sure there's new design or gameplay space there. that's why I'm not sold on arcs vs ally pairs.

­ loves equipments and are the best in returning artifacts from graveyard. so artifacts is not out of the question. that gives another direction besides control and tempo.

to me Junk is too familiar and too played out. it would be more interesting to design around a less popular trio like America or Dega colors. OTOH seems limited in design space and flavor. even R&D don't have much clue about them. now personally I'm not fond of either, but its design and gameplay space is stronger, which is important for a 2-color faction.

of course, this is just my opinion as a player and designer. if you feel you can open up the design space for the challenging pair and forge new gameplay and flavor with , I'm ready to be amazed.

Then there's Dega vs Simic, which seems like the combination where both factions aren't that popular or well-developed yet. But it could turn out to be the most interesting. One side is about huge armies, other side is about huge monsters. Destruction vs creation. This combination could end up being the most fun to design and to play.

got to think about vs some more, and here are some ideas:

­ --
counters - tokens
big monsters - big armies
passive aggressive - confrontation
intuition - sensation
metaphysical - reality
potential - actual
opening phase - combat phase
temporary, ephemeral - permanent, persistent
future - present
creation - destruction
classless - hierarchical
illusions & shapeshifters & hydras - angels & demons & dragons

RWU is about progress unhindered. Where green/black endlessly recycle ideas, RWU is continually competing for fresh ideas. not frivolous ideas like izzet, but something more substantial and practical. not as cold as azorius and not as temperamental as boros.

RWU isn't warless. but the competition is not necessarily just on the battlefield. they fight for ideas, ideals, titles, respect, etc. who has bigger army, who has better technology and weapons, who has more land, wealth, lifestyle, etc. usually they try to settle off the field, yet they have army if talks break down. of course

i always see flying as a subtheme RWU. Where G/B is tied to the earth, RWU dominates the skies. to red it's freedom to roam. to w/u it's the best place to keep watch on what is happening on the ground.