Conversation by Alex

90 cards in Multiverse

75 with no rarity, 4 commons, 3 uncommons,
2 rares, 5 mythics, 1 token

59 colourless, 1 colourless multicolour, 4 white, 3 blue, 2 black, 1 red,
2 green, 7 multicolour, 2 hybrid, 3 artifact, 6 land

991 comments total

A venue for discussions about Magic design

Conversation: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity

Cardset comments (5) | Add a comment on this cardset

Recently active cards: (all recent activity)

Lots of syntax changes, new card qualities, new keyword variants and more. See comments for details.
last 2018-03-09 17:10:09 by Sorrow
Creature – Goblin Wizard
Range (This creature may attack with another creature as a band. This creature is assigned combat damage after non-range creatures.)
last 2018-03-03 14:47:28 by Vitenka
There is badly a need for some sort of common keyword in UR. This is for discussing this issue.
last 2018-03-03 11:22:36 by SecretInfiltrator
It's up. Anyone joining?
last 2018-02-22 16:03:33 by Phopus
last 2018-02-15 10:38:35 by Tahazzar

Recent comments: (all recent activity)
On [Spoilers] Dominaria Design Changes:

Deals damage to any target - After WOM Devign Team used "any target" for their reprint of Warstorm Surge and evidenced the change was coming, I got onboard with the change. I do think it's not helpful to new players that this doesn't explain what the three possible targets are.

Historic - I don't expect to see historic too many times after Dominaria, so I don't have any notable thoughts on its existence.

Legendary soreries -Mechanically think they're cute and fine for a legendary-heavy set. The choice to use legendary the legendary supertype for them doesn't seem to match up with how the rules for legendary permanents work.

No more "mana pool" - I'm with Tahazarr. You add stuff to something. Were 4 extra words eating up that much line space? Maybe on wordy cards they could cut it down to just "add ," but otherwise it just looks whack.

Singular third-person pronouns -About time Wizards made the change

Using "this spell" over the spell's name - Is there any baggage gained or lost with this? I don't mind it. Maybe it's clearer for new players if they were casting multiple copies of the spell that were on the stack together?

Hexproof variants -I missed this in my initial skimming. I may comment later.

Equip variants - I didn't read the examples, so again I have no comment at present.

THE BAR - More like Return to Portal

On [Spoilers] Dominaria Design Changes:

They didn't change what removing abilities does, right? The rulings from the FAQ are consistent with how Yixlid Jailer used to work unless I missed something.

On [Spoilers] Dominaria Design Changes:

As an aside, I've never seen any indication that amuseum has ever interacted with real Magic cards, so I'm not surprised they're unfamiliar with story spotlight cards

On [Spoilers] Dominaria Design Changes:

"Legendary spells" - I always they wouldn't print Commander-only mechanics in Standard, because these spells will certainly not be playable more generally.

I had figured they would try to go big with this set, but I had never imagined they would destroy the rules of the game to do so. Everything about this set looks like it was made by some first-time amateur game designer who's never even read the comp rules. It runs the gamut from lazy (mana production change), to unintuitive (planeswalker redirection change), to worthless (historic), to literally nonfunctional (changing what removing abilities does).

On [Spoilers] Dominaria Design Changes:

I met the term. I filed it away as "Oh, it's a marketing thing." I certainly have never cared about it.

"Cast only if you have a legendary thing already" is not actually any more of a speedbump that "Cast only after you've got 4 land" is; but it somehow feels janky.

On [Spoilers] Dominaria Design Changes:

Yep. I suggest, you go back and do a full text search on your frequented sites, amuseum. Either your section of the community is entirely different than the one I witness, or you should find some mention of storyline spotlights. I know, I randomly come across someone mentioning it every spoiler season (of a main product).

Maybe you just missed them never having consciously read the term.

I'm surprised they've gone full-on Kamigawa with all the uncommon legends. It looks like they'll have a problem with many of the legends having no known backstory, character, personality, nothing to let players relate to them or get attached to them.

I think the fact that so many legendary creatures are tied to the already established history of Dominaria helps plenty. Kamigawa-block had to start from a blank slate, but just putting an established family name or location ties a new legendary to a long illustruous past - both in-universe and on the meta-level. Blackblade Reforged, Bladewing, of Femeref.

There is a reason Time Spiral-block was populated with an above average number of legendaries and this time they embrace this circumstance as a theme. I think that's all the advantage needed that Kamigawa never had.

On [Spoilers] Dominaria Design Changes:

Regarding story spotlight cards (Pia's Revolution, Battle at the Bridge, Hour of Devastation etc): Plenty of the Vorthos types on Tumblr have been eagerly following the story spotlight cards for each new set. I think the "failed approach" is just amuseum failing to pay attention.

I'm surprised they've gone full-on Kamigawa with all the uncommon legends. It looks like they'll have a problem with many of the legends having no known backstory, character, personality, nothing to let players relate to them or get attached to them.

Templating changes like "they", "add {g}" and "damage to any target" were pretty much inevitable. They really should have just done the latter when planeswalkers were first introduced though, not 11 years later.

Legendary instants/sorceries are very weird. It's the kind of thing you could only do in a full-on Kamigawa set with uncommon legends; and even so it seems odd. I guess it's similar to the conditional-dragon spells from DTK like Silumgar's Scorn, or the Silvergill Adept cycle? But straight-up "can't cast this unless" is pretty harsh. I suspect that'll be deemed a design mistake in Maro's retrospective in 18 months' time.

The Sagas seem quite sensible. Something like this seems particularly sensible in a set like Dominaria that wants to include nods to vast swathes of MtG history that they don't have space to make detailed references to. Tahazzar's take on it was even more flavourful, but could easily be a direction the official cards take in a couple more years.

On [Spoilers] Dominaria Design Changes:


OK, "they". I do appreciate pros and cons but on balance I'm pleased they went ahead with it.

Several strange things but I'll see how they go.

I was really hoping for "any target", I'm pleased it happened, I hadn't expected it. But it does seem confusing that "any target" means creatures/players/planeswalkers only, when "any target permanent" is more general. I guess it never matters, the only thing that can target either permanents or players is damage. But it just felt simpler to say you could damage anything, but it only mattered for things that cared about being damaged.

I like the idea of reflecting story moments on cards, but I felt the way to do it was to try to capture not a linear narrative, but a bigger picture, like "the rebellion" not "what planeswalker X did". The story should be something you can describe in half a sentence, but with infinite details people can fall in love with.

On [Spoilers] Dominaria Design Changes:

They've done story spotlights since Kaladesh

apparently nobody cared at all. since this is my first time hearing about it, and it's never been mentioned by the players along with the spoilers. nobody ever goes "ooh i wonder what the spotlight cards are in this set." seems failed approach.

moreover their PW symbol is really poor representation of anything. sterile, no connection to real world or human experience. it just exists, but always seems out of place.

On [Spoilers] Dominaria Design Changes:

... but that Tahazzar's Saga keyword was something so recent...

From where I stand that makes it less notable since WotC works in a year or two in advance so they had probably made that keyword months ago.

The new wording of "Add {g}" bothers me since I find it lacking. I think it did come up in this thread were changes related to mana creation wording was discussed in detail:

The main thing that I take issue with the new wording is that you don't just "add" stuff - you add it to something. And now that something is a thing that has just been omitted, left to interpretation, and failed to specify. For example, "add {g} to mana cost" makes sense, but just "add {g}" doesn't really.

  • Add three mana of any one color. (... to where?)
  • Produce three mana of any one color.
  • "I'm adding mana"
  • "I'm producing mana"
  • "This land adds too much mana"
  • "This land produces too much mana"

The choice between the two should be obvious IMO.

I'm more annoyed at how long it took for the fix to hexproof.

Did they though? I mean really. "Hexproof from [color]" certainly isn't gonna fix anything. "Hexproof from instants"? "Hexproof while tapped"? "Hexproof from creatures"? "Hexproof from hexes"? These all sound pretty janky btw as far as wordings go. The last two of those examples are illustrations as to how stupid we can go with this. What I'm saying is that they should use a word other than "hexproof" for this IMO.


Oh boy, you guys missed this:

When Merfolk Trickster enters the battlefield, tap target creature an opponent controls. It loses all abilities until end of turn.

  • If the target creature has power and toughness written as X/X with an ability that defines its power and toughness, it's 0/0 when it loses all abilities. If its power and toughness are written as X/X+1, it's 0/1, and so on.

Well look at what we have here. I guess that debate is officially finished as well.


I wonder if "after your draw step" could become the next "at beginning of your upkeep" in the future since players usually automatically untap and draw a card at the start of their turn, often missing crucial upkeep triggers (echo and such). This is a problem I last saw with Aulë's Craft for example when I was having a test draft of that set, so I would appreciate that change in general.

(All recent activity)
See other cardsets