usually the fights broke up before the play, right after choosing the ante, when one of the players refused to play the game because they didn't want to play an important rare card against a basic land
@@kinseyandreanietzsche39 Ante cards are pulled face down and are not revealed until the game ends.. So yeah. Jeweled Bird from Arabian Nights is heavily played in the format to mitigate power and other really good cards from being lost. But the thing is, nobody plays this format unless you're actually prepared to lose the cards in your deck. Saw a beta Badlands changing hands 11 months ago. New tournament coming up in a month. I wonder what will happen then :p
A non-trivial amount of my early collection got built off of a mono black deck with ante cards (especially Demonic Attorney, since it amused me to Demonic Tutor for it). At the time, we didn't really think much about the potential value of the cards or the like. And when that started getting clearer, ante was clearly on its way out anyway. Funny enough the major thing that made my play group reconsider it was that it asymmetrically disrupted how the decks played and noting the card / doing it at the end was a bit of a pain plus wouldn't work with ante cards without a lot of redesign, so we just gave up on it.
@@kinseyandreanietzsche39 Often my group would play using the ante cards worth to see who went first and play was not for keeps. You have to set up optional rules before you start so players know what the ante is used for. Often times we also played for art ante - the ante card was given back to the player but not before the wining player got to either sign it or draw some art on it similar to the art cards that are now being professionally done on real cards, it just was not commissioned as it is now. Also 5-color magic which was around before Commander and used way more cards in your deck was played for ante long after it was banned in competitive magic.
Tribute could be a great mechanic, if the cards weren't so weak or the choices weren't so obvious so often. For example, a vanilla 5/5 for 5 is basically unplayable, while a vanilla 3/3 with a lava axe attached for 5 mana is also unplayable. There's no reason to play the card. However, what if it was a 2/2 for 3 with Tribute 1 and a lightning bolt to the face, but also, "Creatures you control with +1/+1 counters have menace." In RDW, 3 damage could be more than a quarter of their life when this is cast, while a 3/3 with some evasion is dangerous. I would love to see it come back in a form that wasn't trash. Making players make tough decisions is one of the best parts of MTG.
Agreed that most of the problem is that the existing cards are bad, with the potential to be worse. But not sure if can really be made to be balanced if your opponent makes the choice - hard enough to balance the current existing multi-mode cards!
Amplify is another mechanic that is good, just poorly implemented. A simply fix is to again add +1/+1 synergy. A 2-mana 1/1 that gives all creatures with +1/+1 counters vigilance. A 3-mana creature that gives first strike, a 4-mana creature that gives flying, etc. suddenly the failstate isn't so bad, because it is at least a semi-anthem effect. Likewise, Sweep gives a really interesting choice to the player casting it, but on NONE of the cards is it on is ever worth playing. Imagine if it was add a +1/+1 counter to each creature you control for each plain you return to your hand. At that point, even returning one land at least does something permanent. Maybe include landfall synergy and then returning multiple lands is useful. Or discard effects. Retrace?
Today is actually my birthday, and whilst it's not been the best one since nobody could celebrate today since it's a Monday, so I've kinda just spent today by myself, so I'm going to classify this as your present to me! Maybe next year you can do "Top 10 Vintage Cards (Minus Power 9)"!
I learned Banding from the old Microprose game. It really shined when blocking as you only needed 1 blocker with banding to control all of you opponents damage.
Honestly, I love the flavor of Epic and would love to see it come back. I think it could be an interesting design to have the Epic spells have ever-growing effects for each time they're copied, putting the pressure on the opponent to close out the game before the spell buries them. Maybe making them scale still wouldn't do enough, but it's a cool design that I'd like to see tried again.
Another way to make Epic good would be to allow the player to play 1 type of spell in addition to the Epic effect that is intended to complement the Epic effect
I actually used to play for ante back in the old days, it made the players take the game more "seriously". also that's what the sideboard was used for, you had spare cards there which you put into your deck after you lost a card.
we built some "second rate" decks for playing with ante - no one wanted to lose their good cards. And quickly realized how busted "Contract from below" was!
Rampage sucks, but I still have fond feelings for it out of nostalgia, playing Magic as a kid. Nizzahon, I just gotta thank you for using Teeka's Dragon and Horrible Hordes as its entry image/background. I pulled those two cards as a kid from boosters! Thanks for the pleasant trip back to my childhood. 🥰 BTW, to add to your point on Rampage, specifically Teeka's Dragon: that it also has flying means your opponent is much less capable of blocking it anyway.
Lure effects on Rampage creatures to make them really worth it is nice in theory, but instead you could just place lure on creatures with automatic kill effects.
@@schwarzerritter5724 "in theory" TBH, the difference between "in theory" and "in practice" is one of the best things I learned in life. And it was playing MTG that taught me that. Something may seem like a completely good idea and yet not work at all.
A certain card with cumulative upkeep was so bad it made Donate useful in competitive magic :) I am not sure if it counts as a failed mechanic or a good one though
Nine other cards with the mechanic have also seen play. While there are bad CA cards, most of them were printed as "has an obviously big downside so you get amazing rates for it" and ended up being at least worth considering.
The other major issue with dexterity cards: if you can’t move your cards before your opponent flips their orb/star, then the optimal way to play magic is to keep all of your cards spread apart at all times. This would be untenably obnoxious at a kitchen table, let alone an event with limited available space for each set of players.
I know people don't think about Un-design much, but #2 should have been Gotcha instead imo. Obviously dexterity cards are awful for tournament Magic and online play, but they totally shine in the Unstable and Unfinity and there's smart fixes like "just a second" to make them work better. Gotcha punished your opponent for talking or even *laughing* in a silly casual game, and you could get endless free recursion on stinkers like counterspells, discard effects, and burn. So bad it killed Un-sets for a decade. (Stickers would probably make a top 20 list; I think the issue is more with the execution than the core idea.)
The dexterity cards are awesome. They are only a problem in competitive environments, which statistically almost no one plays. Playing them with your friends is a hoot. They are super fun and create some really great moments.
@@gakk8658 It really does. It's also one of the only ways to get rid of Enchantments in early Magic. Disenchant is the only pre-Mirage card that says "Destroy target enchantment." There's mass removal like Tranquility and very expensive all-permanent removal like Desert Twister, but only one card before 1996 can blow up an Enchantment. This is why cards like Moat were NUTS--only decks with white could remove them. The Enchant World rule allowed WotC to print game-warping enchantments that could be removed by all colors but the mechanic wasn't terribly well-realized.
I wouldn't call the "Rhystic" ability a failure. The actual ability "do something unless an opponent pays {X}" is VERY successful. It's an evergreen ability that appears in almost every set, often on blue counterspells and white hatebears or prison pieces. It's seen on iconic and meta-defining cards like Mana Leak, Esper Sentinel, Propaganda/Ghostly Prison, Leonin Arbiter and Strict Proctor, etc. etc. It's only a failure if you're narrowly defining it as "cards with that effect **and the word Rhystic in their name**", and even then you need to add an asterisk for Study!
For my preference in playing, Cascade is a mechanism I really hate and find it to be a failure in interesting design. You either play it in a totally broken situation (ie Modern) or when you play it as intended, it is just too random for me - playing with it or against it. Random jackpots are not why I played Magic, and this mechanic accelerated my quitting. There are situations where it is fun, I warrant, like in games where I know things are purposefully goofy and silly, but I just find it more frustrating than fun the vast majority of the time.
For me, the worst mechanic is upkeep/cumulative upkeep because it would steer me wrong. I remember as a kid thinking that these cards must be really powerful to make up for such an expensive downside. But really most cards with upkeep just aren't worth it.
Rampage caused WOTC a huge amount of headaches via calls based around timing of when the rampaging bonuses happened. That's why they told the designers to "stop it". Yes it was also a seldomly used mechanic once players learned how to properly play but in 1994, with no internet, people just called WOTC hotline or sent in mail.
I haven’t watched the video yet, but I predict the number one will be ante. I mean, it has to be the mechanic that got every card mentioning it banned from every format, and might be illegal in quite a few places.
I actually play the Amplify creature Daru Stinger in Pauper. It actually gets a good ability when it is amplified and it combos well with Legion Conquistadores, which let my search my remaining Legion Conquistadores out of the deck if I play one.
Tribute seems really fun! Particularly in a limited environment with +1/+1 counter synergy. Tribute Strix, UW 1/1 Tribute 1 Flying Creatures you control with +1/+1 counters gain lifelink If Tribute Strix was not tributed, draw a card Something like this. A blue-white flyers signpost uncommon! Probably not as powerful as the card that inspired it--but I think it leads to interesting choices where the caster is always somewhat happy.
Charge Across the Araba was pretty good in white weenie, actually. Casting it on curve will all but finish off your opponent and returning all those Plains to your hand is hardly a drawback since you're bound to lose anyway if your opponent manages to last that long.
Epic bugs me significantly, because cards that restrict what you can cast can clearly still be great - shoutouts to Fires of Invention - and Enduring Ideal proves that the mechanic isn't totally awful, but four of the five cards... just, totally suck? Blue's requires your opponent to have things that can kill your opponent, Black is an exceptionally slow mill card, Red's is basically just a burn spell with a random amount on the burn, and Green's is a really slow token generator. Green and Black are definitely worse beyond that though, as they ignore something that's key to Epic - you can still play lands, and thus interact with the board that way. (You can also Channel while it's out which Green and Black's don't work with in spite of Channel being in the same damn set.) You need to have cards that: ~Care about the composition of your deck. If you cast a card that relies on your opponents' deck, and it's the last card you cast, many times you'll simply lose the game by doing so. This is Blue's pitfall. ~Does not care about the composition of your deck in a way you can't interact with once you cast the card, looking at you Red. ~DOES NOT CARE ABOUT THE NUMBER OF CARDS IN YOUR HAND, green and black why did you do that. It's absolutely true that there's very, very little space for cards there, but you could totally design a cycle that works. Imagine if, as a random example, the Black one was a 7-9 mana spell that read something like "Return a creature card from either player's graveyard to the battlefield, then, you may choose a creature, it is sacrificed and deals damage to an opponent equal to its CMC". You could play it as a combo finisher that works with Draco, or a value engine, or as a ghetto Living End, or just use it as a once-a-turn reanimation spell, or any number of other things. Would it be competitive? Maybe not, but it gets players to think, to ask "how best can I break this" and come up with a bunch of answers, and that, I think, is the most important part of your high rarity single cycle "how much would you give up for The Big Effect" card.
Honestly, I still like Rampage to this day. If it would have been properly costed on creatures and spells, it would have been a simple keyword to add to creatures that would make blocking harder like Menace or Intimidate. There are so many other mechanics I would have put in there myself, though the top ones would have been: 1) Flanking; The problem I have with Flanking is it's only an interesting mechanic if enough creatures have it so that it's not basically automatic outside of Limited. Not to mention giving a blocking creature -X/-X is such a boring and random effect for it. 2) Shadow; Making another version of Flying that only references itself is just a bad idea. Yes, Horsemanship is the same way, but Three Kingdoms was "supposed" to be a stand alone set. There's no excuse for Shadow. It just adds an extra keyword to attacking and blocking, and was never going to be supported enough to be anything besides "unblockable" outside of Limited/Block. 3) Fear; While Intimidate itself was never the best mechanic (can't be blocked except by creature that shares a color or artifact creatures), the mechanic is was based on that was only "can't be blocked except by Black or artifact creatures" was such a limiting and color specific design. A lot of early removal did this too, with Terror and Blade not effecting Black creatures (and terror not effecting artifact creatures either). I know people have complained about Landwalk and Protection From A Color effects in the past with the way they are GREAT against some decks and useless against others, and Fear to me is an even sillier, limiting, and color specific version of the same argument.
Radiance is extra bad inside of its block because that was a format that encouraged multi color decks. This meant that your radiance spells were even more likely to impact the wrong creatures much more often.
I want ante cards to come back for draft-oriented sets or maybe just in a Secret Lair or something, because it would be fun to have some to put into a cube.
Something else with Chaos Orb and Falling Star: "Destroy permanent": 2 mana, then 1 mana when you need it. "3 damage to creatures": 3 mana together, one of which is red. Why would Anyone run falling star over chaos orb? Even if someone could destroy chaos orb, you could activate it in response.
they could probably do an errata of the ante cards to make them just exile/interact with exile but all that would really do is force them to ban contract from below again and then shrug because the rest of them would remain unplayably bad
Amplify was one of those kitchen table mechanics. Alot of fun in that scenario but once you learn abit more about Mtg it wasn't that great. I remember starting with onslaught and beasts were a thing back then. Especially with contested cliffs to have virtually free removal day and night. And a good chunk of them had amplify 1-3.
I feel so vindicated when Nizzahon talks specifically about cards I put into my "Worst Cards Ever" cube on these lists. It reassures me that I'm giving my players the best worst experience possible 🙏
Amplify is a really powerful mechanic that was merely put on weak cards but has no intrinsic downside to the mechanic. Amplify 2 and Amplify 3 creatures should cost 1 or 2 mana Amplify 1 creatures should be the huge Timmy beatsticks. Nothing is wrong with Amplify as a mechanic, they just believed wrong about how big vs small creatures should use it. Kilnmouth Dragon with Amplify 1, in the world with 1 mana Amplify 3 creatures, and spells and effects that allow the moving of counters, would *still* be an interesting card because your board state could have many counters and it should be possible to get them onto Kilnmouth Dragon for its Tap ability to use them. 1 mana Amplify 3 creatures are just no longer insane in comparison to today's speed of game with powerful creatures being most of the time better than Wild Nacatl.
"Rhystic Study, a card which forces your opponents to make a decision every single time they draw a card" Rhystic Study forces your opponents to make a decision when they cast a spell. The card which forces your opponents to make a decision when they draw a card is Rhystic Tithe from Ravnica Allegiance, almost 19 years after Prophecy.
The Lure effect wasn't really appealing on Rampage compared to what he had. We had Thicket Basilisks before we had Rampage. We talked about using Lure on the Basilisk, which works better than on a creature with deathtouch. If we got crazy (and lucky), we did might actually do this. We just didn't care about Rampage. When Rampage came back in Alliances, they were trying to make it do something on 2/3 cards. Mirage...I don't know why it's here. Flying + Rampage? Rampage was inferior to most evasion abilities, especially things like "can only be blocked by one creature" or just flying. I think you're off on Amplify. I'm not here to say it's amazing, but it's fine. It's a limited focused mechanic and the context of the set is important. Onslaught was heavily, HEAVILY tribal. If you could not produce large number of one creature type in Onslaught, you weren't going to have a good deck. There are 13 common white creatures in Onslaught. 8 are soldiers. Also, based on 2003 creature costs, Aven Warhawk was acceptable at one creature in hand (5 mana 3/3), although you don't think you're getting a big win. Amplify isn't the strongest tribal effect, but it's fine in this mix. Bands isn't that bad. I get tired of this one. People repeat it. They weren't there before the rules change or they never knew what it was for. The biggest problem is that the timeframe where limited was a real thing and where it was available on decent cards was short. It wasn't as good as most of the other original mechanics. But It is better than every mechanic on this list. It's much weaker on offense, but if that's the standard then Reach should be on here. In fact, in the right limited environment, it can make it nearly impossible for your opponent to attack, at least under the old rules. Math may be for blockers, but the blocker could ignore most of the math with bands. Before the rules changed, if you could understand the combat rules, you could understand bands. The change in the combat rules greatly changed bands and trample, but they were focused on making trample easy since it was always more important. This meant bands became more complex. But it's also not that complicated. People just don't bother learning. On offense, it means you can group creatures into a "band" and if a player blocks one part of the "band", they block it all. On either side, it means the player taking the damage gets to decided where it goes.
I always felt that the guild signature mechanics from the original Ravnica block were too unbalanced some were really good (convoke, transmute, dredge, bloodthirst, replicate, hellbent) and others were awful (radiant, haunt, forecast, graft)
It's funny how bad Amplify actually was because Kilnmouth Dragon is a bruiser in my mono-red dragon tribal edh deck. So, I have an artificially inflated opinion of the mechanic.
The funny thing about Clash is that the card selection it gives you was supposed to be the appeal (this was before Scry became evergreen, so this kind of mechanic was unprecedent), with actually winning the clash being a nice but unimportant bonus, which is why most cards with Clash look so weak. When the first Ravnica set rolled on, none of the enemy color pairs had any identity to speak of (indeed, it was Ravnica's job to create their identities in the first place). Not helping that white was still considered to be the "defensive color". So when it came time to design the WR mechanic, rather than default for the hyper-offensiveness Boros is known for today, they had to figure out a mechanic that was both defensive (white) and aggresive (red), and the mechanic they came up with was basically "discrimination based on color". Radiance is still a little odd because it feels like it would be more at home spread in a "colors matters" set such as Shadowmoor, rather than being confined to just two colors. Cumulative Upkeep I feel has a lot of potential, both mechanic-wise and flavor-wise. Imagine a cool spell with a powerful effect, such as taking control of all your opponent's creatures, with the downside that the opponent could play around it by simply stalling for time. It had the misfortune of being created in a time when Wizard didn't have a good grasp on what made a card good, so a lot of bad cards were made worse by the addition of Upkeep. Cumulative Upkeep also has the distinction of being a one of the few mechanics that warps the rules of the entire game with its mere existence (the upkeep phase exists and is so named because that's when you payed the Cumulative Upkeep, after all).
What's strange is, the actual design of cards in Ravnica (APART from Radiance) is what you expect from Boros. Boros Swiftblade, Flame-Kin Zealot, Lightning Helix, Skyknight Legionnaire, Boros Guildmage -- I could go on. My point is that they did in fact establish the identity we know for Boros -- that makes the mechanic even stranger, though.
Actually, the Upkeep phase is where you pay the Upkeep cost, not necessarily Cumulative Upkeep. Since Alpha there where cards that required mana every single turn, or in multiple turns. Cumulative Upkeep only made these costs grow over time, but it was always a part of the game. See the original Elder Dragons, for an example.
I would have been very surprised if #2 and #1 weren't in the top 3. From other comments it seems Subgame was excluded because it was only on one non-un card. I disagree with this because section 726 of the rules is 800+ words that treat it as a mechanic (Rosewater also considers it a "mechanic" instead of a unique effect for whatever that's worth). Ante is actually kinda fun in vs. AI simulator play (the Microprose game keeps it as an option), but it should obviously never be used with other humans. I wonder if Rampage could be decent if put on a creature that also has Menace. I doubt it would be worth even keeping Rampage keyworded even if done.
The issue with tribute isn't the mechanic, it's that most of the cards are just terrible. Most of them have one choice be an existing low-end creature. It's so weirdly bad. Part of the issue with tribute is that it uses up a lot of text, so you can't put cool things in like attack triggers that depend on counters or something... Thunder Brute is a 6 mana 5/5 with Haste and trample (in fact, technically worse, as it loses haste at end of turn, so it can't block Gingerbrute). Why can't it be bigger and cheaper? Make him cost 5 and be a base 6/6 and he'd still not see constructed play but at least he'd not be embarrassingly bad. Snake of the Golden Grove is a 5 mana 4/4 that gains you 4 life. Rubbish, but it's a common, so fine. Siren of the Fanged Coast is a 4/4 flier for 5. It's just air elemental that doesn't work against creatureless decks. Awful. Give it flash. This makes it much more interesting, either a big blocker or it steals a creature (but doesn't untap it, so an attacker can't be used to block, so sometimes you might do it before attackers to get more blocking, that seems kinda cool). Shrike Harpy is basically the same, but awful against token decks and hexproof opponents. Maybe make it cost 1 less? And change it to each opponent so it doesn't get messed up by leyline of sanctity type-effects Pharagax Giant is a 5/5 for 5. Maybe make it always deal damage, but if they pay tribute it hits the controller too? Ornitharch is a 5/5 flier for 5. This is basically Angel of Invention with 3 less abilities and a tiny stat boost where your opponent picks instead of you. Bad, but maybe just give it vigiliance and it becomes better. Oracle of Bones is a 5/3 with haste for 4 that requires you to have a card in hand to at least bluff a threat... He's fine, I guess... The opponent will pretty much always pay the tribute if you have cards in hand, so maybe he could do something good both ways... Like pay the tribute and I also get to return an instant or sorcery from graveyard to hand, don't pay it and risk that I have a massive spell to cast... Nessian Demolok is a 5 mana 6/6. I mean, it's okay in draft I guess... Maybe have them have to sac a noncreature permanent if tribute is paid, so the tribute is determining who picks the things that's destroyed... Flame-Wreathed Phoenix is a 5/5 flier for 4. That's not too bad I suppose, but it's clearly not going to see constructed play. As a mythic, it needs to be better. Maybe make it always have haste and then duplicate the tribute as an attack trigger (so each attack it gets 2 more counters)... Oh, or why not give it wither, so they can't afford to chump block it back to hand? That sounds cool. Nessian Wilds ravager is a 6 mana 6/6 that fights on coming in. That's alright. Maybe give it reach? Or protection or regen or just something to make it not just a standard dude after the fight... Fanatic of Xenagos is actually not too bad. The best card and it saw some play in standard and has made no lasting impact in anything else.
I think Kindred/Tribal belongs in the conversation. While there are good cards with it, abandoning an entire card type is arguably a pretty big failure. (Battles haven't been abandoned, they just waited a bit to see their reception, like they did with Planeswalkers.)
If you have to remove the ante cards from your deck if you're not playing with ante, does that mean you could run Every ante card, to cut your deck in half at the start of each match, and have a Much more consistent deck than your opponent?
Doesn't quite apply here since he was careful to say "all or most of the cards with the mechanic are unplayable" as a factor here which does mean we're specifically looking at what actually made it into print, but in general it does bother me that CCG communities have an issue of conflating bad cards with bad mechanics. Often these mechanics have perfectly legitimate and interesting design space that could lead to good card designs... but the designers just didn't do that. Things like tribute and amplify here are good examples of that, it's very possible to make fun and viable cards with those keywords but they just happened to end up on pack fillers in lower power sets so we didn't really get any good examples of the possibilities in the actual game itself. Those possibilities are still there though, so they aren't flatly "bad" ideas.
i take great offense to 2 of the things list, its is so concerned about "if a mechanic is good in competitive and not what is "fun" rampage is an amazing idea, it just needs to be put on cards your opponent is going to WANT to double block and costed properly,a bad implementation doesn't mean the mechanic itself is bad Radiance is again.. AMAZING, its incredibly fun to play with,, and yeah its mostly overcosted. but it lets you do so many cool things, like get around hexproof and shroud. and there are plenty of ways to build a deck around ways protect your own stuff to get around things like, like mark of asylum. i have an entire deck based around wojek embermage and its one of my favorites to play.
19:14 Interesting thought about those “ante” cards- theoretically if you made your deck with like thirty to forty ante cards, since they all instruct you to remove them from your deck when not playing for ante- you could just have a twenty to thirty card combo deck left when you start the game.
I guess really 52 ante cards- 3 lotus petals, thassa’s oracle, flusterstorm, force of will, daze, island would be the ideal way to do this, so a bit more than just thirty to forty…
Wrong. That's not an "effect" that applies during a match. It's a restriction deck rule, so you have to follow it during the construction of a deck, and if your deck doesn't have 60 legal cards, then you cannot even start a match.
I am so surprised subgame cards weren't even mentioned. I was certain shahrazad was going to me mentioned at #1 (granted, ante deserves #1, I just forgot it was a mechanic)
I think Banding is a perfectly fine and and flavorful idea, but just as rampage, it's irrelevant in most games and even when it's not, it's very underwhelming. Enlist was a great callback to it and fixed a lot of its issues.
I actually thought Epic was pretty cool. It made me immediately think how to circumvent the restriction. Even though it might've not been particularly good, Epic was, after all, in the same set as Channel.
Rampage gests a bad rap. in a card of the day post many years ago, it was explained that in legends design rampage was called berserk and allowed a creature with it to attack (n) times and only the first attack could be blocked. so in that case, wolverine pack is. a 4/4 for 4. problem was they thought the name would cause confusion with the card berserk and changed the mechanic. makes craw giants flavor text make a lot more sense when hit second attack couldnt be blocked
I remember 1 thing from my first ever MTG game, back in like 95ish; my opponent asked if I wanted to play for ante. I asked wth is ante, he explained it and I said.. Uhm.... no... He just said, alright cool, lets play then. Odd 😆
Cards being overcosted is really bad reason to call a mechanic failed. It's kind of infuriating to think of all the recent trash that escapes this list solely because of power creep.
definitely not. We have a player with a mobility impairment in my group. He can mostly tap his cards (not always), but needs help shuffling and so. He just says "these xxx lands tap for mana, that creature attacks, this artifact taps targeting yyy". None of those depend on the actual ability of the player to perform the action with any level of skill. With the orb, you can't just say "the orb flips and lands on these cards".
Why were most of Kamigawa's mechanics about NOT playing Magic? Like, it's one thing that those cards are bad, but even if they were balanced better cards that basically make it so you DON'T play Magic don't really make for fun, enjoyable gameplay
SPOILER:
Obviously, Rhystic Study makes you pay when you cast spells, not when you draw.
All of my arguments remain.
What do you think of the "Poison Mechanic" ? I just know a handful of cards from there
Babe get up, Nizzahon is explaining bad cards again!!
Not until he changes the name of “Nizza notes”
Lol
Lol
Babe wake up, Nizza is roasting Band again!!
I'm up, I'm up...
I'm divorcing you.
I can only imagine the fistfights that would ensue if one party refused to give up the card they lost from ante.
usually the fights broke up before the play, right after choosing the ante, when one of the players refused to play the game because they didn't want to play an important rare card against a basic land
@@kinseyandreanietzsche39
Ante cards are pulled face down and are not revealed until the game ends.. So yeah.
Jeweled Bird from Arabian Nights is heavily played in the format to mitigate power and other really good cards from being lost.
But the thing is, nobody plays this format unless you're actually prepared to lose the cards in your deck.
Saw a beta Badlands changing hands 11 months ago. New tournament coming up in a month. I wonder what will happen then :p
A non-trivial amount of my early collection got built off of a mono black deck with ante cards (especially Demonic Attorney, since it amused me to Demonic Tutor for it). At the time, we didn't really think much about the potential value of the cards or the like. And when that started getting clearer, ante was clearly on its way out anyway. Funny enough the major thing that made my play group reconsider it was that it asymmetrically disrupted how the decks played and noting the card / doing it at the end was a bit of a pain plus wouldn't work with ante cards without a lot of redesign, so we just gave up on it.
@@joakimsormo we did reaveal the cards obviously
@@kinseyandreanietzsche39 Often my group would play using the ante cards worth to see who went first and play was not for keeps. You have to set up optional rules before you start so players know what the ante is used for. Often times we also played for art ante - the ante card was given back to the player but not before the wining player got to either sign it or draw some art on it similar to the art cards that are now being professionally done on real cards, it just was not commissioned as it is now. Also 5-color magic which was around before Commander and used way more cards in your deck was played for ante long after it was banned in competitive magic.
Sweep is a Saviours of Kamigawa mechanic. It was supposed to work with their ridiculous "7 or more cards in hand" mechanics.
Showing Juju Bubble to demonstrate cumulative upkeep just makes the mechanic look even worse than it already is!
What're you talking about!? Juju Bubble is amazing! It makes a great coaster 😃
Well, I intentionally showed it as an example of it being bad, but I talked about it being ...not bad too!
Tribute could be a great mechanic, if the cards weren't so weak or the choices weren't so obvious so often. For example, a vanilla 5/5 for 5 is basically unplayable, while a vanilla 3/3 with a lava axe attached for 5 mana is also unplayable. There's no reason to play the card. However, what if it was a 2/2 for 3 with Tribute 1 and a lightning bolt to the face, but also, "Creatures you control with +1/+1 counters have menace." In RDW, 3 damage could be more than a quarter of their life when this is cast, while a 3/3 with some evasion is dangerous.
I would love to see it come back in a form that wasn't trash. Making players make tough decisions is one of the best parts of MTG.
Agreed that most of the problem is that the existing cards are bad, with the potential to be worse. But not sure if can really be made to be balanced if your opponent makes the choice - hard enough to balance the current existing multi-mode cards!
Amplify is another mechanic that is good, just poorly implemented. A simply fix is to again add +1/+1 synergy. A 2-mana 1/1 that gives all creatures with +1/+1 counters vigilance. A 3-mana creature that gives first strike, a 4-mana creature that gives flying, etc. suddenly the failstate isn't so bad, because it is at least a semi-anthem effect.
Likewise, Sweep gives a really interesting choice to the player casting it, but on NONE of the cards is it on is ever worth playing. Imagine if it was add a +1/+1 counter to each creature you control for each plain you return to your hand. At that point, even returning one land at least does something permanent. Maybe include landfall synergy and then returning multiple lands is useful. Or discard effects. Retrace?
Today is actually my birthday, and whilst it's not been the best one since nobody could celebrate today since it's a Monday, so I've kinda just spent today by myself, so I'm going to classify this as your present to me! Maybe next year you can do "Top 10 Vintage Cards (Minus Power 9)"!
Happy birthday, Lobster!
Happy birthday
Happy birthday, my glorious lobster liege.
A happy birthday to you, great crusader!
OUR SAVIOR HAS RETURNED 3:51
I learned Banding from the old Microprose game. It really shined when blocking as you only needed 1 blocker with banding to control all of you opponents damage.
It works a bit different with how damage changed, but it is still a big advantage when blocking.
Honestly, I love the flavor of Epic and would love to see it come back. I think it could be an interesting design to have the Epic spells have ever-growing effects for each time they're copied, putting the pressure on the opponent to close out the game before the spell buries them. Maybe making them scale still wouldn't do enough, but it's a cool design that I'd like to see tried again.
Another way to make Epic good would be to allow the player to play 1 type of spell in addition to the Epic effect that is intended to complement the Epic effect
I actually used to play for ante back in the old days, it made the players take the game more "seriously". also that's what the sideboard was used for, you had spare cards there which you put into your deck after you lost a card.
we built some "second rate" decks for playing with ante - no one wanted to lose their good cards. And quickly realized how busted "Contract from below" was!
Glad to see justice for banding!
Rampage sucks, but I still have fond feelings for it out of nostalgia, playing Magic as a kid.
Nizzahon, I just gotta thank you for using Teeka's Dragon and Horrible Hordes as its entry image/background. I pulled those two cards as a kid from boosters! Thanks for the pleasant trip back to my childhood. 🥰
BTW, to add to your point on Rampage, specifically Teeka's Dragon: that it also has flying means your opponent is much less capable of blocking it anyway.
General Marhault is a better design but its niche for sure 😂
Lure effects on Rampage creatures to make them really worth it is nice in theory, but instead you could just place lure on creatures with automatic kill effects.
@@schwarzerritter5724 "in theory"
TBH, the difference between "in theory" and "in practice" is one of the best things I learned in life. And it was playing MTG that taught me that. Something may seem like a completely good idea and yet not work at all.
A certain card with cumulative upkeep was so bad it made Donate useful in competitive magic :) I am not sure if it counts as a failed mechanic or a good one though
Nine other cards with the mechanic have also seen play. While there are bad CA cards, most of them were printed as "has an obviously big downside so you get amazing rates for it" and ended up being at least worth considering.
The other major issue with dexterity cards: if you can’t move your cards before your opponent flips their orb/star, then the optimal way to play magic is to keep all of your cards spread apart at all times. This would be untenably obnoxious at a kitchen table, let alone an event with limited available space for each set of players.
Charge Across the Araba was insane in limited. “Win target game” was basically how it read at times. Instant speed overrun
TEEKA'S FUCKING DRAGON!!! 9/9 MORE LIKE 10/10 OP AS HELL \m/
I know people don't think about Un-design much, but #2 should have been Gotcha instead imo. Obviously dexterity cards are awful for tournament Magic and online play, but they totally shine in the Unstable and Unfinity and there's smart fixes like "just a second" to make them work better. Gotcha punished your opponent for talking or even *laughing* in a silly casual game, and you could get endless free recursion on stinkers like counterspells, discard effects, and burn. So bad it killed Un-sets for a decade. (Stickers would probably make a top 20 list; I think the issue is more with the execution than the core idea.)
The dexterity cards are awesome. They are only a problem in competitive environments, which statistically almost no one plays. Playing them with your friends is a hoot. They are super fun and create some really great moments.
The first deck that I built was a walls deck that ran 4 copies of a card that gave banding to all walls. It was actually surprisingly functional.
Chaos Orb was commonly house-ruled (inc. competitive play) as "destroy target permanent" to prevent physical shenanigans.
Which is funny because it makes it one of the best removal spells ever
@@gakk8658 It really does. It's also one of the only ways to get rid of Enchantments in early Magic. Disenchant is the only pre-Mirage card that says "Destroy target enchantment." There's mass removal like Tranquility and very expensive all-permanent removal like Desert Twister, but only one card before 1996 can blow up an Enchantment. This is why cards like Moat were NUTS--only decks with white could remove them. The Enchant World rule allowed WotC to print game-warping enchantments that could be removed by all colors but the mechanic wasn't terribly well-realized.
I wouldn't call the "Rhystic" ability a failure. The actual ability "do something unless an opponent pays {X}" is VERY successful. It's an evergreen ability that appears in almost every set, often on blue counterspells and white hatebears or prison pieces. It's seen on iconic and meta-defining cards like Mana Leak, Esper Sentinel, Propaganda/Ghostly Prison, Leonin Arbiter and Strict Proctor, etc. etc. It's only a failure if you're narrowly defining it as "cards with that effect **and the word Rhystic in their name**", and even then you need to add an asterisk for Study!
Hmm, prewatch shortlist:
Dexterity cards
Ante cards
Cumulative upkeep
Phasing
Banding (especially bands with other)
Rampage
Splice/arcane
Phasing
Expansion hosers (City in a Bottle, Apocalypse Chime especially, and Golgothian Sylex)
Color/tribal hosers (Boil, Choke, Flashfires, Tivadar's Crusade)
I get it that it was a very bad idea, but there was no need to hate on phasing twice ;)
@@MrTrellheim I blame stream of consciousness, was writing that at the end of a ten hour shift.
@@MrTrellheim it phased out and then came back
Sweep mechanics sounds amazing when combined with destruction cards like armageddon, balance, disk etc.
For my preference in playing, Cascade is a mechanism I really hate and find it to be a failure in interesting design. You either play it in a totally broken situation (ie Modern) or when you play it as intended, it is just too random for me - playing with it or against it. Random jackpots are not why I played Magic, and this mechanic accelerated my quitting.
There are situations where it is fun, I warrant, like in games where I know things are purposefully goofy and silly, but I just find it more frustrating than fun the vast majority of the time.
For me, the worst mechanic is upkeep/cumulative upkeep because it would steer me wrong. I remember as a kid thinking that these cards must be really powerful to make up for such an expensive downside. But really most cards with upkeep just aren't worth it.
Rampage caused WOTC a huge amount of headaches via calls based around timing of when the rampaging bonuses happened. That's why they told the designers to "stop it". Yes it was also a seldomly used mechanic once players learned how to properly play but in 1994, with no internet, people just called WOTC hotline or sent in mail.
I haven’t watched the video yet, but I predict the number one will be ante. I mean, it has to be the mechanic that got every card mentioning it banned from every format, and might be illegal in quite a few places.
I actually play the Amplify creature Daru Stinger in Pauper. It actually gets a good ability when it is amplified and it combos well with Legion Conquistadores, which let my search my remaining Legion Conquistadores out of the deck if I play one.
Tribute seems really fun! Particularly in a limited environment with +1/+1 counter synergy.
Tribute Strix, UW
1/1
Tribute 1
Flying
Creatures you control with +1/+1 counters gain lifelink
If Tribute Strix was not tributed, draw a card
Something like this. A blue-white flyers signpost uncommon! Probably not as powerful as the card that inspired it--but I think it leads to interesting choices where the caster is always somewhat happy.
Charge Across the Araba was pretty good in white weenie, actually. Casting it on curve will all but finish off your opponent and returning all those Plains to your hand is hardly a drawback since you're bound to lose anyway if your opponent manages to last that long.
Epic bugs me significantly, because cards that restrict what you can cast can clearly still be great - shoutouts to Fires of Invention - and Enduring Ideal proves that the mechanic isn't totally awful, but four of the five cards... just, totally suck? Blue's requires your opponent to have things that can kill your opponent, Black is an exceptionally slow mill card, Red's is basically just a burn spell with a random amount on the burn, and Green's is a really slow token generator. Green and Black are definitely worse beyond that though, as they ignore something that's key to Epic - you can still play lands, and thus interact with the board that way. (You can also Channel while it's out which Green and Black's don't work with in spite of Channel being in the same damn set.)
You need to have cards that:
~Care about the composition of your deck. If you cast a card that relies on your opponents' deck, and it's the last card you cast, many times you'll simply lose the game by doing so. This is Blue's pitfall.
~Does not care about the composition of your deck in a way you can't interact with once you cast the card, looking at you Red.
~DOES NOT CARE ABOUT THE NUMBER OF CARDS IN YOUR HAND, green and black why did you do that.
It's absolutely true that there's very, very little space for cards there, but you could totally design a cycle that works. Imagine if, as a random example, the Black one was a 7-9 mana spell that read something like "Return a creature card from either player's graveyard to the battlefield, then, you may choose a creature, it is sacrificed and deals damage to an opponent equal to its CMC". You could play it as a combo finisher that works with Draco, or a value engine, or as a ghetto Living End, or just use it as a once-a-turn reanimation spell, or any number of other things. Would it be competitive? Maybe not, but it gets players to think, to ask "how best can I break this" and come up with a bunch of answers, and that, I think, is the most important part of your high rarity single cycle "how much would you give up for The Big Effect" card.
Best line in this whole video; "Thats why before the first tournment, Ante cards, and Sharazhad, were banned."
Honestly, I still like Rampage to this day. If it would have been properly costed on creatures and spells, it would have been a simple keyword to add to creatures that would make blocking harder like Menace or Intimidate.
There are so many other mechanics I would have put in there myself, though the top ones would have been:
1) Flanking; The problem I have with Flanking is it's only an interesting mechanic if enough creatures have it so that it's not basically automatic outside of Limited. Not to mention giving a blocking creature -X/-X is such a boring and random effect for it.
2) Shadow; Making another version of Flying that only references itself is just a bad idea. Yes, Horsemanship is the same way, but Three Kingdoms was "supposed" to be a stand alone set. There's no excuse for Shadow. It just adds an extra keyword to attacking and blocking, and was never going to be supported enough to be anything besides "unblockable" outside of Limited/Block.
3) Fear; While Intimidate itself was never the best mechanic (can't be blocked except by creature that shares a color or artifact creatures), the mechanic is was based on that was only "can't be blocked except by Black or artifact creatures" was such a limiting and color specific design. A lot of early removal did this too, with Terror and Blade not effecting Black creatures (and terror not effecting artifact creatures either). I know people have complained about Landwalk and Protection From A Color effects in the past with the way they are GREAT against some decks and useless against others, and Fear to me is an even sillier, limiting, and color specific version of the same argument.
Radiance is extra bad inside of its block because that was a format that encouraged multi color decks. This meant that your radiance spells were even more likely to impact the wrong creatures much more often.
I want ante cards to come back for draft-oriented sets or maybe just in a Secret Lair or something, because it would be fun to have some to put into a cube.
Something else with Chaos Orb and Falling Star:
"Destroy permanent": 2 mana, then 1 mana when you need it.
"3 damage to creatures": 3 mana together, one of which is red.
Why would Anyone run falling star over chaos orb?
Even if someone could destroy chaos orb, you could activate it in response.
they could probably do an errata of the ante cards to make them just exile/interact with exile but all that would really do is force them to ban contract from below again and then shrug because the rest of them would remain unplayably bad
Banding is already quite confusing... then you remember that evasion keywords exist. I still do not know how those interact with each other.
If any creature on the band can block a creature with an evasion ability, the whole band can. That was in the old paper manuals.
Amplify was one of those kitchen table mechanics. Alot of fun in that scenario but once you learn abit more about Mtg it wasn't that great. I remember starting with onslaught and beasts were a thing back then. Especially with contested cliffs to have virtually free removal day and night. And a good chunk of them had amplify 1-3.
I understand why Smothering Tithe couldn't be called Rhystic Tithe when it was printed, but I kind of want to make an alter now.
17:25 Herald of Leshrac comes to mind as a card with cumulative upkeep that I think has a really cool design
I think most of the non-mana payment cumulative upkeep cards are at least interesting.
I feel so vindicated when Nizzahon talks specifically about cards I put into my "Worst Cards Ever" cube on these lists. It reassures me that I'm giving my players the best worst experience possible 🙏
Everyone knew the ante would be #1. That is such a pain and I cannot figure out why this gambling thing was so bad.
Rampage needs Goblin War Drums or another universal Menace card to make it work at least a little.
I remember using Feral Throwback a lot whit Nostalgic dreams in my Trample Beasts Deck, so Amplify was kinda good to me
Amplify is a really powerful mechanic that was merely put on weak cards but has no intrinsic downside to the mechanic.
Amplify 2 and Amplify 3 creatures should cost 1 or 2 mana
Amplify 1 creatures should be the huge Timmy beatsticks.
Nothing is wrong with Amplify as a mechanic, they just believed wrong about how big vs small creatures should use it.
Kilnmouth Dragon with Amplify 1, in the world with 1 mana Amplify 3 creatures, and spells and effects that allow the moving of counters, would *still* be an interesting card because your board state could have many counters and it should be possible to get them onto Kilnmouth Dragon for its Tap ability to use them.
1 mana Amplify 3 creatures are just no longer insane in comparison to today's speed of game with powerful creatures being most of the time better than Wild Nacatl.
Sweep coulda been fine for red if it had a player targeting one for damage. Black needed a discard one for that.
"Rhystic Study, a card which forces your opponents to make a decision every single time they draw a card"
Rhystic Study forces your opponents to make a decision when they cast a spell. The card which forces your opponents to make a decision when they draw a card is Rhystic Tithe from Ravnica Allegiance, almost 19 years after Prophecy.
I think a mechanic like Tribute is very interesting - but both effects must be significantly overcosted to truly make a hard choice
The Lure effect wasn't really appealing on Rampage compared to what he had. We had Thicket Basilisks before we had Rampage. We talked about using Lure on the Basilisk, which works better than on a creature with deathtouch. If we got crazy (and lucky), we did might actually do this.
We just didn't care about Rampage. When Rampage came back in Alliances, they were trying to make it do something on 2/3 cards. Mirage...I don't know why it's here. Flying + Rampage?
Rampage was inferior to most evasion abilities, especially things like "can only be blocked by one creature" or just flying.
I think you're off on Amplify. I'm not here to say it's amazing, but it's fine.
It's a limited focused mechanic and the context of the set is important. Onslaught was heavily, HEAVILY tribal. If you could not produce large number of one creature type in Onslaught, you weren't going to have a good deck. There are 13 common white creatures in Onslaught. 8 are soldiers.
Also, based on 2003 creature costs, Aven Warhawk was acceptable at one creature in hand (5 mana 3/3), although you don't think you're getting a big win.
Amplify isn't the strongest tribal effect, but it's fine in this mix.
Bands isn't that bad. I get tired of this one. People repeat it. They weren't there before the rules change or they never knew what it was for. The biggest problem is that the timeframe where limited was a real thing and where it was available on decent cards was short.
It wasn't as good as most of the other original mechanics. But It is better than every mechanic on this list.
It's much weaker on offense, but if that's the standard then Reach should be on here. In fact, in the right limited environment, it can make it nearly impossible for your opponent to attack, at least under the old rules. Math may be for blockers, but the blocker could ignore most of the math with bands.
Before the rules changed, if you could understand the combat rules, you could understand bands. The change in the combat rules greatly changed bands and trample, but they were focused on making trample easy since it was always more important. This meant bands became more complex.
But it's also not that complicated. People just don't bother learning.
On offense, it means you can group creatures into a "band" and if a player blocks one part of the "band", they block it all.
On either side, it means the player taking the damage gets to decided where it goes.
Perhaps you can answer this question: why was Shahrazad banned separately? Since it mentions ante, wouldn’t it have been banned anyway?
It mentions ante (only in printed text, not in Oracle text), but it doesn't interact with it.
I always felt that the guild signature mechanics from the original Ravnica block were too unbalanced some were really good (convoke, transmute, dredge, bloodthirst, replicate, hellbent) and others were awful (radiant, haunt, forecast, graft)
It's funny how bad Amplify actually was because Kilnmouth Dragon is a bruiser in my mono-red dragon tribal edh deck. So, I have an artificially inflated opinion of the mechanic.
The funny thing about Clash is that the card selection it gives you was supposed to be the appeal (this was before Scry became evergreen, so this kind of mechanic was unprecedent), with actually winning the clash being a nice but unimportant bonus, which is why most cards with Clash look so weak.
When the first Ravnica set rolled on, none of the enemy color pairs had any identity to speak of (indeed, it was Ravnica's job to create their identities in the first place). Not helping that white was still considered to be the "defensive color". So when it came time to design the WR mechanic, rather than default for the hyper-offensiveness Boros is known for today, they had to figure out a mechanic that was both defensive (white) and aggresive (red), and the mechanic they came up with was basically "discrimination based on color". Radiance is still a little odd because it feels like it would be more at home spread in a "colors matters" set such as Shadowmoor, rather than being confined to just two colors.
Cumulative Upkeep I feel has a lot of potential, both mechanic-wise and flavor-wise. Imagine a cool spell with a powerful effect, such as taking control of all your opponent's creatures, with the downside that the opponent could play around it by simply stalling for time. It had the misfortune of being created in a time when Wizard didn't have a good grasp on what made a card good, so a lot of bad cards were made worse by the addition of Upkeep. Cumulative Upkeep also has the distinction of being a one of the few mechanics that warps the rules of the entire game with its mere existence (the upkeep phase exists and is so named because that's when you payed the Cumulative Upkeep, after all).
What's strange is, the actual design of cards in Ravnica (APART from Radiance) is what you expect from Boros. Boros Swiftblade, Flame-Kin Zealot, Lightning Helix, Skyknight Legionnaire, Boros Guildmage -- I could go on. My point is that they did in fact establish the identity we know for Boros -- that makes the mechanic even stranger, though.
Actually, the Upkeep phase is where you pay the Upkeep cost, not necessarily Cumulative Upkeep. Since Alpha there where cards that required mana every single turn, or in multiple turns. Cumulative Upkeep only made these costs grow over time, but it was always a part of the game. See the original Elder Dragons, for an example.
Point of order on #9: Rampage pumps the creature for EACH BLOCKER BEYOND THE FIRST ONE.
I feel like I said that.
Rampage was supposed to be a way deal with Banding. Yes Banding is horrible, but it was a common mechanic for awhile.
Honestly I think banding is neat and I’m kinda sad it was too confusing for most people.
I would have been very surprised if #2 and #1 weren't in the top 3. From other comments it seems Subgame was excluded because it was only on one non-un card. I disagree with this because section 726 of the rules is 800+ words that treat it as a mechanic (Rosewater also considers it a "mechanic" instead of a unique effect for whatever that's worth). Ante is actually kinda fun in vs. AI simulator play (the Microprose game keeps it as an option), but it should obviously never be used with other humans.
I wonder if Rampage could be decent if put on a creature that also has Menace. I doubt it would be worth even keeping Rampage keyworded even if done.
The issue with tribute isn't the mechanic, it's that most of the cards are just terrible. Most of them have one choice be an existing low-end creature. It's so weirdly bad.
Part of the issue with tribute is that it uses up a lot of text, so you can't put cool things in like attack triggers that depend on counters or something...
Thunder Brute is a 6 mana 5/5 with Haste and trample (in fact, technically worse, as it loses haste at end of turn, so it can't block Gingerbrute). Why can't it be bigger and cheaper? Make him cost 5 and be a base 6/6 and he'd still not see constructed play but at least he'd not be embarrassingly bad.
Snake of the Golden Grove is a 5 mana 4/4 that gains you 4 life. Rubbish, but it's a common, so fine.
Siren of the Fanged Coast is a 4/4 flier for 5. It's just air elemental that doesn't work against creatureless decks. Awful. Give it flash. This makes it much more interesting, either a big blocker or it steals a creature (but doesn't untap it, so an attacker can't be used to block, so sometimes you might do it before attackers to get more blocking, that seems kinda cool).
Shrike Harpy is basically the same, but awful against token decks and hexproof opponents. Maybe make it cost 1 less? And change it to each opponent so it doesn't get messed up by leyline of sanctity type-effects
Pharagax Giant is a 5/5 for 5. Maybe make it always deal damage, but if they pay tribute it hits the controller too?
Ornitharch is a 5/5 flier for 5. This is basically Angel of Invention with 3 less abilities and a tiny stat boost where your opponent picks instead of you. Bad, but maybe just give it vigiliance and it becomes better.
Oracle of Bones is a 5/3 with haste for 4 that requires you to have a card in hand to at least bluff a threat... He's fine, I guess... The opponent will pretty much always pay the tribute if you have cards in hand, so maybe he could do something good both ways... Like pay the tribute and I also get to return an instant or sorcery from graveyard to hand, don't pay it and risk that I have a massive spell to cast...
Nessian Demolok is a 5 mana 6/6. I mean, it's okay in draft I guess... Maybe have them have to sac a noncreature permanent if tribute is paid, so the tribute is determining who picks the things that's destroyed...
Flame-Wreathed Phoenix is a 5/5 flier for 4. That's not too bad I suppose, but it's clearly not going to see constructed play. As a mythic, it needs to be better. Maybe make it always have haste and then duplicate the tribute as an attack trigger (so each attack it gets 2 more counters)... Oh, or why not give it wither, so they can't afford to chump block it back to hand? That sounds cool.
Nessian Wilds ravager is a 6 mana 6/6 that fights on coming in. That's alright. Maybe give it reach? Or protection or regen or just something to make it not just a standard dude after the fight...
Fanatic of Xenagos is actually not too bad. The best card and it saw some play in standard and has made no lasting impact in anything else.
Braid of Fire is one of my favorite card designs ever (although unintentionally since it's way better without mana burn)
I think Kindred/Tribal belongs in the conversation. While there are good cards with it, abandoning an entire card type is arguably a pretty big failure. (Battles haven't been abandoned, they just waited a bit to see their reception, like they did with Planeswalkers.)
If you have to remove the ante cards from your deck if you're not playing with ante, does that mean you could run Every ante card, to cut your deck in half at the start of each match, and have a Much more consistent deck than your opponent?
I guess it has to appear on multiple cards to be a mechanic, otherwise "subgame" would be up there with "dexterity" and "ante".
Doesn't quite apply here since he was careful to say "all or most of the cards with the mechanic are unplayable" as a factor here which does mean we're specifically looking at what actually made it into print, but in general it does bother me that CCG communities have an issue of conflating bad cards with bad mechanics. Often these mechanics have perfectly legitimate and interesting design space that could lead to good card designs... but the designers just didn't do that. Things like tribute and amplify here are good examples of that, it's very possible to make fun and viable cards with those keywords but they just happened to end up on pack fillers in lower power sets so we didn't really get any good examples of the possibilities in the actual game itself. Those possibilities are still there though, so they aren't flatly "bad" ideas.
i take great offense to 2 of the things list, its is so concerned about "if a mechanic is good in competitive and not what is "fun"
rampage is an amazing idea, it just needs to be put on cards your opponent is going to WANT to double block and costed properly,a bad implementation doesn't mean the mechanic itself is bad
Radiance is again.. AMAZING, its incredibly fun to play with,, and yeah its mostly overcosted. but it lets you do so many cool things, like get around hexproof and shroud. and there are plenty of ways to build a deck around ways protect your own stuff to get around things like, like mark of asylum. i have an entire deck based around wojek embermage and its one of my favorites to play.
19:14
Interesting thought about those “ante” cards- theoretically if you made your deck with like thirty to forty ante cards, since they all instruct you to remove them from your deck when not playing for ante- you could just have a twenty to thirty card combo deck left when you start the game.
I guess really 52 ante cards- 3 lotus petals, thassa’s oracle, flusterstorm, force of will, daze, island would be the ideal way to do this, so a bit more than just thirty to forty…
Wrong. That's not an "effect" that applies during a match. It's a restriction deck rule, so you have to follow it during the construction of a deck, and if your deck doesn't have 60 legal cards, then you cannot even start a match.
I am so surprised subgame cards weren't even mentioned. I was certain shahrazad was going to me mentioned at #1 (granted, ante deserves #1, I just forgot it was a mechanic)
There's one subgame card. Hard to call it a mechanic, otherwise every unique effect that appears on one card would be a mechanic.
I'm surprised that 'play a magic sub-game' wasn't at least an honorable mention, but I guess it's technically not a mechanic.
I sincerely think Banding needs to come back because it fills a legitimate purpose and isn’t actually very confusing
I would love to see Rampage return, but staple it to Menace creatures lol
I think Banding is a perfectly fine and and flavorful idea, but just as rampage, it's irrelevant in most games and even when it's not, it's very underwhelming.
Enlist was a great callback to it and fixed a lot of its issues.
Unlike Rampage, you have a lot of control over when Banding happens. I think that makes a pretty big difference.
He really did a top10 list just to call out Teeka's Dragon
The one ring should have dad culimative upkeep.
Me over here with Tikkas dragon in a dimir dragon edh shell with Nemesis mask to make that happen at some point
I actually thought Epic was pretty cool. It made me immediately think how to circumvent the restriction. Even though it might've not been particularly good, Epic was, after all, in the same set as Channel.
Rampage gests a bad rap. in a card of the day post many years ago, it was explained that in legends design rampage was called berserk and allowed a creature with it to attack (n) times and only the first attack could be blocked. so in that case, wolverine pack is. a 4/4 for 4. problem was they thought the name would cause confusion with the card berserk and changed the mechanic. makes craw giants flavor text make a lot more sense when hit second attack couldnt be blocked
Do a Top 10 Urza’s Saga please!
I remember 1 thing from my first ever MTG game, back in like 95ish; my opponent asked if I wanted to play for ante.
I asked wth is ante, he explained it and I said.. Uhm.... no...
He just said, alright cool, lets play then.
Odd 😆
Papi always posts during my overnight shifts I love it ❤❤❤
He mentioned teeka’s again!!
Saw someone anti a black lotus and lose it once.
We need top 10 best or worst cards that get rid of a permanent and replace it with something else
Sweep is from Saviors, not Betrayers which is funny because the Echo cards were cited from Saviors correctly.
Yo rampage could be cool if you forced your opponents creatures to block. But thats rare.
Yeah, I know...but Lure on my Craw Giant (back in the day) was still hilarious...and usually game ending.
This is not the greatest mechanic in the world, no. This is just Tribute.
Tribute was bad overall, but fanatic of Xenagos was house in standard
Tribute is fine if both options are pushed to offset the choice aspect.
It's just weak cards, not a bad mechanic.
Cards being overcosted is really bad reason to call a mechanic failed. It's kind of infuriating to think of all the recent trash that escapes this list solely because of power creep.
My top 3 before seeing what they are: banding, ante, and manual dexterity.
Isn't any card with a tap ability a dexterity card?
definitely not. We have a player with a mobility impairment in my group. He can mostly tap his cards (not always), but needs help shuffling and so. He just says "these xxx lands tap for mana, that creature attacks, this artifact taps targeting yyy".
None of those depend on the actual ability of the player to perform the action with any level of skill. With the orb, you can't just say "the orb flips and lands on these cards".
Barrel down sokenzan is acutally playable, or even good with borborygmos enraged in edh
Incidentally, Rhystic Study is also awful outside of multiplayer.
Nizza, do you know the story of Kai Budde using Jeweled Bird to beat Dan Clegg, and would you consider doing a Short about it?
The Invitational that resulted in Voidmage Prodigy, right?
Devil K. Nevil
Dude you missed Devil K. Nevil on #2 physical cards.
Why were most of Kamigawa's mechanics about NOT playing Magic? Like, it's one thing that those cards are bad, but even if they were balanced better cards that basically make it so you DON'T play Magic don't really make for fun, enjoyable gameplay
Wouldn’t be gambling as it’s a skills-based game. If poker can qualify as skills-based, then MTG would definitely qualify.
Do people not gamble in poker?
I like the epic cards as build around finishers in commander, but I'm also bad at the game so
No mention of Phasing? Not even as a HM
Nope. Since they brought it back they've used it quite effectively.