2015-02-16 00:23:31:
Link
commented on the cardset Eragon
As Alex has said, I don't see what about them makes them different from creatures. I also think that it's confusing migrating creature subtypes into the type area.
2015-02-15 17:54:08:
Alex
commented on the cardset Eragon
That actually works better with the normal creature subtype system than with Rider as a type. You've got Eragon, Seeker of Vengeance saying "Eragon gets +2/+2 and gains flying and first strike if you control a Dragon called Saphira." But at the moment, Saphira, Azure Hatchlingisn't "a Dragon called Saphira". It's "a Saphira dragon" (in the same way that Imperious Perfect is "an Elf creature" or Holy Strength is "an Aura enchantment"). Saphira, Azure Hatchling is also "a Dragon called Saphira, Azure Hatchling", but that would still be true if it was type "Creature - Dragon".
Now, I'm all for efforts to introduce a new type. Take a look at Challenge # 031 for some of our attempts in the past. But one of the big rules of new card types is they should do something that's not possible with existing types. And so far you haven't said anything about what Riders will do, but they appear to be exactly like creatures, including having power, toughness, creature keywords, and implicitly attacking and blocking. That's too similar to type creature.
So if you want them to work like creatures, I'd encourage you to make them creatures. I assume you're planning to have several Saphira cards and several Eragon cards? It ought to still be possible to make any of your several Saphiras notice any of your several Eragons, while still letting all the existing creature rules work on them without needing hundreds of changes all through the Comp Rules.
2015-02-15 16:16:22:
Samuel
commented on the cardset Eragon
Riders and Dragons follow the legends rule in the same way planeswalkers do. You can't control 2 different Eragons, just like you can't control a JTMS and a Jace, Architect of Thought.
2015-02-15 16:13:46:
Samuel
commented on the cardset Eragon
Why is Rider a type? Rider and Dragon are types so that abilities such as Eragon's pairing with Saphira, who will be posted soon, are easy to format and understand. If Rider and Dragon are types, then I can easily make it so that Eragon and Saphira are each more powerful when the other is on the battlefield.
It's part of a mirrored pair, should the other be rare too?
Alright, Rider and Dragon are no longer types! Each Rider/Dragon's name is a creature type instead. That work?
Alright.
The boost doesn't fit the flavor.
I'm sure we can figure out some way to let creatures notice a specific subset of other creatures.
Indestructible is a keyword now, so this should read "Target creature gains indestructible UEOT."
This seems more like a rare than a mythic.
Maybe
for Zealous Persecution? That might be okay. (Remember, lands are OP.)
That's a blue ability.
As Alex has said, I don't see what about them makes them different from creatures. I also think that it's confusing migrating creature subtypes into the type area.
This seems really boring for a mythic.
Yes (in later sets), would that still work with them just being creatures?
That actually works better with the normal creature subtype system than with Rider as a type. You've got Eragon, Seeker of Vengeance saying "Eragon gets +2/+2 and gains flying and first strike if you control a Dragon called Saphira." But at the moment, Saphira, Azure Hatchling isn't "a Dragon called Saphira". It's "a Saphira dragon" (in the same way that Imperious Perfect is "an Elf creature" or Holy Strength is "an Aura enchantment"). Saphira, Azure Hatchling is also "a Dragon called Saphira, Azure Hatchling", but that would still be true if it was type "Creature - Dragon".
Now, I'm all for efforts to introduce a new type. Take a look at Challenge # 031 for some of our attempts in the past. But one of the big rules of new card types is they should do something that's not possible with existing types. And so far you haven't said anything about what Riders will do, but they appear to be exactly like creatures, including having power, toughness, creature keywords, and implicitly attacking and blocking. That's too similar to type creature.
So if you want them to work like creatures, I'd encourage you to make them creatures. I assume you're planning to have several Saphira cards and several Eragon cards? It ought to still be possible to make any of your several Saphiras notice any of your several Eragons, while still letting all the existing creature rules work on them without needing hundreds of changes all through the Comp Rules.
Riders and Dragons follow the legends rule in the same way planeswalkers do. You can't control 2 different Eragons, just like you can't control a JTMS and a Jace, Architect of Thought.
Why is Rider a type? Rider and Dragon are types so that abilities such as Eragon's pairing with Saphira, who will be posted soon, are easy to format and understand. If Rider and Dragon are types, then I can easily make it so that Eragon and Saphira are each more powerful when the other is on the battlefield.