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?
In one of the first tournaments I ever played, I had a Chaos Orb. I got two black Knights on the board quickly, but then my opponent played a Juzam Djinn. I played my Chaos Orb, and the opponent called over a judge to witness. He said I couldn't move any of my cards, and unfortunately,. my Knights were right next to each other and fairly near his Djinn. Of course, my orb landed on both of my knights and missed his Djinn completely. Word spread quickly, and people were laughing about it for the rest of the tournament. :P
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.
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.
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 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!
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 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.
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.
Old School 93/94 came up with a clever way to errata Chaos Orb and Falling Star to work within the rules. It involves choosing permanents you want to flip on (one for Chaos Orb, any number of nonoverlapping ones for Falling Star, although in practice you can't hit more than 6 things with it) and then arranging those and doing the flips. They do have the issue of being not accessible to disabled players still, but other than that, they're really fun and a great part of the format.
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.
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!
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
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.
@@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.
It could also be good on well statted creatures with relevant abilities. The issue is not the ability's deisgn itself, but the fact that WotC was too afraid of it, just like Bushido.
@@DanoLefourbe Yeah it definitely needs something to go along with it, otherwise Rampage X is pretty much "cannot be blocked by creatures with toughness X or less". Maybe "all creatures must block (this or something else) or get tapped and don't untap during the next untap step". I don't think I've ever seen rampage even activate, because most creatures only had rampage 1.
I don't think there is anything wrong with rampage the cards are just bad. The mechanic could be added to so many random mythics to boost their power nowadays without really adding much. If you add a random rampage3 to a 5 mana 6/6 then it suddenly becomes relevant
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.
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 may a bit behind the times but I think Risk Factor was the only time I see a Tribute type style of card work and I think that was because it slotted well on red aggro as either a clock or as gas to insulate themselves from sweepers.
@@zarator7429 I don't really remember that one myself but if it did it goes back to Risk Factor's design where the choices are "Card advantage" or "Speeding the clock" where both choices are advantageous, and eventually one of the choices can't be made anymore
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.
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.
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.
As far as clash goes, IMO Redeem the Lost, which is a 1W instant, is a pretty decent card. I run it in my Karlov and Zur decks. Giving a creature protection from a color for a turn may seem kinda weak and possibly delaying the inevitable, but the fact that you can potentially bounce the spell back to your hand after winning a clash can be a game changer. There are many ways to ensure that you win a clash. Just my two cents.
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
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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 it being left off the list since it's silver border only, but I really think Gotcha should have at least got a (dis)honourable mention. It really ruined the set it was in by going against what the set was supposed to be about. Un-sets are supposed to be fun and casual but the strategically correct way to play Unhinged was to not say anything to avoid accidentally triggering your opponent's Gotcha abilities.
I think there's actually a mechanic worse than the Ante, and - funnily enough - it comes from the similar era? I'm talking about "permanent change of ownership" cards, like Bronze Tablet. Now, Ante at least required consent from both players, so you can simply decide not to play it. But cards like Bronze Tablet had no restriction - you could sit to what you think it's no-stake game of Magic, only for someone to swipe up something like your Shivan Dragon. Now, if Ante was gambling, those cards were pretty much *stealing*, and that's even higher on the list of things you probably wouldn't want to be associated with your game And let's not even start with the logistics. With Ante, at least you put a physical card down. But how you're gonna manage cards that permanently switch hands, with copy effects or tokens? Can I turn my bulk land into copy, and trade it for your 100$ dollars card? Can I make a token that's a copy of it, and literally trade the card for nothing? Yeah. Ante might be bad, but permanent ownership (literally and figuratively) takes the cake
There are actually more cards in Prophecy that use the Rhystic design than just the ones that have the word "Rhystic" in the title. Cards like Withdraw and Reconsider are all designed in the spirit of the Rhystic subtheme, while creatures like Glittering Lynx, Soul Charmer, Plague Fiend and Spiketail Hatchling also play into it. Rhystic magic was the backbone of the set, which is why Prophecy has stuff like Citadel of Pain and Well of Discovery that interact with the number of untapped lands a player ends their turn with.
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.
You pretty much need lure + trample + rampage on a single creature to make it work. That said i can see them bringing it back for a card or 2 in a newer stet, the same way clash was in the markov manner commander deck.
I think this video demonstrates that maybe some mechanics could be reused but in different ways. For example, Tribute is certainly not a good mechanic in standard et al. It can be interesting in commander because you choose opponent A to make this decision but inflict the damage on opponent B. I would like to see them print a Tribute-heavy Commander deck. Amplify is perhaps the best example here of the mechanic is too weak, but if the numbers were changed it would be a lot more useful. For example, Aven Warhawk is certainly not a good card but what if it was, say, Amplify 4? It could be played quite effectively in the right situation but it certainly has it's drawbacks if it is drawn at a bad time; the risk you take in running it.
Chaos Orb is really popular on Magic 93/94 tournaments, although you have to adhere to some "gentleman rules": you only use it on one card and your opponent can't make it hard for you to get it. In that environment, Chaos Orb is an answer to any permanent in the game, and it's strange to find a deck that doesn't carry it. In a similar way, Contract From Below is a thoroughly broken card in the Shandalar game, where ante doesn't matter as much as powerful cards are easier to get. Did they change the rules on defensive banding? As I recall it, that was where banding shined in my opinion (NOTE: I'm a very bad player and my opinion does not count). You needed a banding creature for every normal creature on attack, but you could make a huge band with only one banding creature on defense, which made blocking big creatures easier.
I wouldn't call Chaos Orb's 93/94 functionality "gentleman rules." It's actual errata enforced within the rules to make the cards functions. But otherwise I agree. It's actually really fun because the chance for failure is there and when it does fail, it's usually a really big deal in the game.
Just you wait, one of these days I'm going to just sit there, playing swamp after swamp after swamp (and a spell book or thought vessel or something), then I'll float ten, play a Sink into Takenuma, returning a half dozen into my hand while emptying yours and follow it up with a massive Neverending Torment. Sweep and Epic FTW!
the problem with tribute is the numbers were never really enough to warrant the mana cost. instead of getting a 3/3 creature and do 5 damage to each opponent, you get a 5 mana 5/5. whoppdee doo. if it were a 3 mana creature, it would be a much bigger decision for your opponent to deal with
i really love the concept of ante, which is why we need another deckbuilding RPG like Shandalar. it would destroy the paper game to implement it, but I would love to see ante tourneys on Arena the old school way where you had to sideboard in for every loss, cause every card has the same value there, you're losing wildcards to craft replacements, its not like you're risking a $300 card.
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.
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
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.
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.
"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.
Ehhhhh... In clash's defense, it's kind of okay in limited. Lorwyn was also the set that introduced Evoke, so loading your deck up with expensive creatures you intended to only use for their Evoke ETBs (and hard casting was the backup plan) to boost your clash effects wasn't a terrible plan. Just kinda gimmicky
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.
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)
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.)
I think Clash deserves some merit because it encourages having a higher mana deck. It was implemented to some success in Hearthstone, but same issue; it was too unreliable. Maybe if were two cards instead it would do the trick... Also Radiance sounds very cool on paper (hehe) ! I'm a sucker for symmetrical effects, and sounds something that would make sense in the lore. Too bad they implemented it so poorly.
I think clash would be a lot less of a coinflip if it was “reveal until you hit a nonland” or something similar. As is, even if you build your deck around it, you still flip a land 1/3rd of the time
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 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.
For the target audience when Magic was first released (i.e. young to young adult males), there was a good analog to ante and dexterity cards...flipping baseball cards. Although I don't think people thought of flipping cards as "gambling", and nobody's parents panicked. But nobody was flipping with a mint Babe Ruth or Roberto Clemente, either; so nobody would play for ante with the Power 9 or such. Like commander, you'd have a different set of decks that you would play for ante. In short, ante and dexterity cards were trying to include common mechanics from the other "collectible card games" of the time. Until it was clear that Magic was just too different and those game modes weren't popular.
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 🙏
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)
Good that you showed contract from below, it deserves to be mentioned that it's the best card in magic. Like power9 doesn't even come close to the power of 1 mana draw7
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.
I've got a rebacked collectors edition Chaos Orb in my cube and people draft it just because it's so silly and it's the only chance they get to play one.
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".
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.
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 😆
I think that the first card you shared was designed that way.... There are bad cards and there are intentional cards. If you were to play that in a EDH deck, you'd probably be playing it with other cards that have coin flip like effects or that allow your opponent to interact with them for a fun game of magic that's what that card does it creates fun for your opponent. Every card that has an interaction with the other player is not designed to be competitive I'm just letting you know. Surfer games when you want to laugh and talk to each other.
I don't think Tribute or Rampage are as bad as, say, Epic from a design perspective, even if none of the cards with them are as good or interesting as Enduring Ideal. The issue is that they never designed good cards with the mechanic, not that the mechanic itself is bad. Rampage is just kind of boring and needlessly convoluted for the miniscule impact it has on most games, so fair enough. Tribute, though, is flavorful and mechanically interesting. It just needed to be WAY more pushed on a card by card basis. If Pharagax Giant were either a 5/5 for 3 or a 3/3 that dealt 5 damage to the opponent for 3, it would have been a Limited staple by the standards of the time, even if you always got the worse outcome. It might have even seen constructed play.
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.
OUR SAVIOR HAS RETURNED 3:51
Sweep is a Saviours of Kamigawa mechanic. It was supposed to work with their ridiculous "7 or more cards in hand" mechanics.
It's a shame there was never a green sweep card, it would have been fun to break with landfall triggers.
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?
In one of the first tournaments I ever played, I had a Chaos Orb. I got two black Knights on the board quickly, but then my opponent played a Juzam Djinn. I played my Chaos Orb, and the opponent called over a judge to witness. He said I couldn't move any of my cards, and unfortunately,. my Knights were right next to each other and fairly near his Djinn. Of course, my orb landed on both of my knights and missed his Djinn completely. Word spread quickly, and people were laughing about it for the rest of the tournament. :P
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.
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!
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.
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!
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!
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.)
Glad to see justice for banding!
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.
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.
Old School 93/94 came up with a clever way to errata Chaos Orb and Falling Star to work within the rules. It involves choosing permanents you want to flip on (one for Chaos Orb, any number of nonoverlapping ones for Falling Star, although in practice you can't hit more than 6 things with it) and then arranging those and doing the flips. They do have the issue of being not accessible to disabled players still, but other than that, they're really fun and a great part of the format.
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.
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!
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
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/
Rhystic Study doesn't tax card draw, but spells cast 12:06
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
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.
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.
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 like rampage would be at least slightly more useful if it was paired with menace.
It could also be good on well statted creatures with relevant abilities.
The issue is not the ability's deisgn itself, but the fact that WotC was too afraid of it, just like Bushido.
@@DanoLefourbe Yeah it definitely needs something to go along with it, otherwise Rampage X is pretty much "cannot be blocked by creatures with toughness X or less". Maybe "all creatures must block (this or something else) or get tapped and don't untap during the next untap step". I don't think I've ever seen rampage even activate, because most creatures only had rampage 1.
I don't think there is anything wrong with rampage the cards are just bad. The mechanic could be added to so many random mythics to boost their power nowadays without really adding much. If you add a random rampage3 to a 5 mana 6/6 then it suddenly becomes relevant
That card already exists, the problem is that your opponent just doesn't block and then you get a very overcosted creature.
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.
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.
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.
I may a bit behind the times but I think Risk Factor was the only time I see a Tribute type style of card work and I think that was because it slotted well on red aggro as either a clock or as gas to insulate themselves from sweepers.
Vexing Devil had pretty similar design space, and for a period of time was a staple in Modern Burn decks, until better burn creatures were printed.
Am I misremembering, or wasn't Sword-Point Diplomacy also viable during Ixalan Standard?
@@zarator7429 I don't really remember that one myself but if it did it goes back to Risk Factor's design where the choices are "Card advantage" or "Speeding the clock" where both choices are advantageous, and eventually one of the choices can't be made anymore
I always thought that ante effects that let you permanently steal cards would be pretty awesome in a best of 3 cube.
extremely fixing-heavy cube with lots of ante sounds like a blast
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.
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.
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.
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.
As far as clash goes, IMO Redeem the Lost, which is a 1W instant, is a pretty decent card. I run it in my Karlov and Zur decks. Giving a creature protection from a color for a turn may seem kinda weak and possibly delaying the inevitable, but the fact that you can potentially bounce the spell back to your hand after winning a clash can be a game changer. There are many ways to ensure that you win a clash. Just my two cents.
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
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Sweep mechanics sounds amazing when combined with destruction cards like armageddon, balance, disk etc.
I understand it being left off the list since it's silver border only, but I really think Gotcha should have at least got a (dis)honourable mention.
It really ruined the set it was in by going against what the set was supposed to be about. Un-sets are supposed to be fun and casual but the strategically correct way to play Unhinged was to not say anything to avoid accidentally triggering your opponent's Gotcha abilities.
I think there's actually a mechanic worse than the Ante, and - funnily enough - it comes from the similar era?
I'm talking about "permanent change of ownership" cards, like Bronze Tablet. Now, Ante at least required consent from both players, so you can simply decide not to play it. But cards like Bronze Tablet had no restriction - you could sit to what you think it's no-stake game of Magic, only for someone to swipe up something like your Shivan Dragon. Now, if Ante was gambling, those cards were pretty much *stealing*, and that's even higher on the list of things you probably wouldn't want to be associated with your game
And let's not even start with the logistics. With Ante, at least you put a physical card down. But how you're gonna manage cards that permanently switch hands, with copy effects or tokens? Can I turn my bulk land into copy, and trade it for your 100$ dollars card? Can I make a token that's a copy of it, and literally trade the card for nothing?
Yeah. Ante might be bad, but permanent ownership (literally and figuratively) takes the cake
There are actually more cards in Prophecy that use the Rhystic design than just the ones that have the word "Rhystic" in the title. Cards like Withdraw and Reconsider are all designed in the spirit of the Rhystic subtheme, while creatures like Glittering Lynx, Soul Charmer, Plague Fiend and Spiketail Hatchling also play into it. Rhystic magic was the backbone of the set, which is why Prophecy has stuff like Citadel of Pain and Well of Discovery that interact with the number of untapped lands a player ends their turn with.
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.
You pretty much need lure + trample + rampage on a single creature to make it work. That said i can see them bringing it back for a card or 2 in a newer stet, the same way clash was in the markov manner commander deck.
I remember using Feral Throwback a lot whit Nostalgic dreams in my Trample Beasts Deck, so Amplify was kinda good to me
Charge Across the araba was a WinCon back in the day. Also, mono color was more common back then.
I think this video demonstrates that maybe some mechanics could be reused but in different ways. For example, Tribute is certainly not a good mechanic in standard et al. It can be interesting in commander because you choose opponent A to make this decision but inflict the damage on opponent B. I would like to see them print a Tribute-heavy Commander deck. Amplify is perhaps the best example here of the mechanic is too weak, but if the numbers were changed it would be a lot more useful. For example, Aven Warhawk is certainly not a good card but what if it was, say, Amplify 4? It could be played quite effectively in the right situation but it certainly has it's drawbacks if it is drawn at a bad time; the risk you take in running it.
Chaos Orb is really popular on Magic 93/94 tournaments, although you have to adhere to some "gentleman rules": you only use it on one card and your opponent can't make it hard for you to get it. In that environment, Chaos Orb is an answer to any permanent in the game, and it's strange to find a deck that doesn't carry it.
In a similar way, Contract From Below is a thoroughly broken card in the Shandalar game, where ante doesn't matter as much as powerful cards are easier to get.
Did they change the rules on defensive banding? As I recall it, that was where banding shined in my opinion (NOTE: I'm a very bad player and my opinion does not count). You needed a banding creature for every normal creature on attack, but you could make a huge band with only one banding creature on defense, which made blocking big creatures easier.
I wouldn't call Chaos Orb's 93/94 functionality "gentleman rules." It's actual errata enforced within the rules to make the cards functions. But otherwise I agree. It's actually really fun because the chance for failure is there and when it does fail, it's usually a really big deal in the game.
Best line in this whole video; "Thats why before the first tournment, Ante cards, and Sharazhad, were banned."
Just you wait, one of these days I'm going to just sit there, playing swamp after swamp after swamp (and a spell book or thought vessel or something), then I'll float ten, play a Sink into Takenuma, returning a half dozen into my hand while emptying yours and follow it up with a massive Neverending Torment. Sweep and Epic FTW!
the problem with tribute is the numbers were never really enough to warrant the mana cost. instead of getting a 3/3 creature and do 5 damage to each opponent, you get a 5 mana 5/5. whoppdee doo. if it were a 3 mana creature, it would be a much bigger decision for your opponent to deal with
i really love the concept of ante, which is why we need another deckbuilding RPG like Shandalar. it would destroy the paper game to implement it, but I would love to see ante tourneys on Arena the old school way where you had to sideboard in for every loss, cause every card has the same value there, you're losing wildcards to craft replacements, its not like you're risking a $300 card.
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.
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
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.
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.
"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.
Ehhhhh...
In clash's defense, it's kind of okay in limited.
Lorwyn was also the set that introduced Evoke, so loading your deck up with expensive creatures you intended to only use for their Evoke ETBs (and hard casting was the backup plan) to boost your clash effects wasn't a terrible plan. Just kinda gimmicky
Honestly I think banding is neat and I’m kinda sad it was too confusing for most people.
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.
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)
Everyone knew the ante would be #1. That is such a pain and I cannot figure out why this gambling thing was so bad.
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.)
I think Clash deserves some merit because it encourages having a higher mana deck. It was implemented to some success in Hearthstone, but same issue; it was too unreliable. Maybe if were two cards instead it would do the trick...
Also Radiance sounds very cool on paper (hehe) ! I'm a sucker for symmetrical effects, and sounds something that would make sense in the lore. Too bad they implemented it so poorly.
I think clash would be a lot less of a coinflip if it was “reveal until you hit a nonland” or something similar. As is, even if you build your deck around it, you still flip a land 1/3rd of the time
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.
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?
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.
For the target audience when Magic was first released (i.e. young to young adult males), there was a good analog to ante and dexterity cards...flipping baseball cards. Although I don't think people thought of flipping cards as "gambling", and nobody's parents panicked. But nobody was flipping with a mint Babe Ruth or Roberto Clemente, either; so nobody would play for ante with the Power 9 or such. Like commander, you'd have a different set of decks that you would play for ante. In short, ante and dexterity cards were trying to include common mechanics from the other "collectible card games" of the time. Until it was clear that Magic was just too different and those game modes weren't popular.
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 🙏
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.
Good that you showed contract from below, it deserves to be mentioned that it's the best card in magic. Like power9 doesn't even come close to the power of 1 mana draw7
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.
I've got a rebacked collectors edition Chaos Orb in my cube and people draft it just because it's so silly and it's the only chance they get to play one.
Sweep coulda been fine for red if it had a player targeting one for damage. Black needed a discard one for that.
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".
Sweep is from Saviors, not Betrayers which is funny because the Echo cards were cited from Saviors correctly.
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.
I have a Cumulative Upkeep EDH deck and it is shockingly not awful. It's not good mind you, but still better than I expected.
I guess it has to appear on multiple cards to be a mechanic, otherwise "subgame" would be up there with "dexterity" and "ante".
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.
Rampage needs Goblin War Drums or another universal Menace card to make it work at least a little.
Barrel down sokenzan is acutally playable, or even good with borborygmos enraged in edh
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 😆
Yeah, I know...but Lure on my Craw Giant (back in the day) was still hilarious...and usually game ending.
I think that the first card you shared was designed that way.... There are bad cards and there are intentional cards.
If you were to play that in a EDH deck, you'd probably be playing it with other cards that have coin flip like effects or that allow your opponent to interact with them for a fun game of magic that's what that card does it creates fun for your opponent. Every card that has an interaction with the other player is not designed to be competitive I'm just letting you know. Surfer games when you want to laugh and talk to each other.
I think a mechanic like Tribute is very interesting - but both effects must be significantly overcosted to truly make a hard choice
I think Tribute could have been a really good, fun and flavorful mechanic. But they were clearly too worried about it being overpowered
Papi always posts during my overnight shifts I love it ❤❤❤
Is it overcost or has power creep come too far? I say both.
Braid of Fire is one of my favorite card designs ever (although unintentionally since it's way better without mana burn)
I don't think Tribute or Rampage are as bad as, say, Epic from a design perspective, even if none of the cards with them are as good or interesting as Enduring Ideal. The issue is that they never designed good cards with the mechanic, not that the mechanic itself is bad.
Rampage is just kind of boring and needlessly convoluted for the miniscule impact it has on most games, so fair enough.
Tribute, though, is flavorful and mechanically interesting. It just needed to be WAY more pushed on a card by card basis. If Pharagax Giant were either a 5/5 for 3 or a 3/3 that dealt 5 damage to the opponent for 3, it would have been a Limited staple by the standards of the time, even if you always got the worse outcome. It might have even seen constructed play.