Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2019 23:24:07 GMT
Hello all.
I am currently designing partially inspired by the Roman Empire. One of the two main locales for conflict within its story is the capital city of Iolus, rife with people with conflicting opinions over an ongoing invasion. Blue (the teachers, scholars, philosophers, so forth) and white (the governmental body suppressing resistance to the invasion) are sharing a keyword action I have currently named Forum with the following rules text:
"Each player reveals the top card of their library. If you reveal the card with the highest converted mana cost, look at the top three cards of your library and rearrange them in any order."
As it stands, Forum is readily comparable to Lorwyn and Mordingtide's Clash mechanic. Both mechanics reveal the top cards of players' libraries and reward revealing the card with the highest converted mana cost. Both also create opportunities for small card filtering. However, Clash essentially allows both players to scry 1, while Forum can only benefit the triggering player and does nothing inherently if the triggering player loses. Clashing functions more as a randomly determined kicker to spells instead of its own reward, while most of the cards designed with Forum instead assume card filtering is its own reward.
Assuming the mechanic doesn't need any changes, I'm happy with how it's been integrated into the rest of the set. All colors have access to scrying at common, but blue moreso as per existing distribution of the mechanic, and checking the top card of libraries synergizes with both blue and white's ability to place opponents' cards back on top of libraries. I also think the mechanic is flavorfully accurate as a representation of competing ideas exchanged in public meeting places.
My worries with Forum are as follows, and I would appreciate any feedback:
I am currently designing partially inspired by the Roman Empire. One of the two main locales for conflict within its story is the capital city of Iolus, rife with people with conflicting opinions over an ongoing invasion. Blue (the teachers, scholars, philosophers, so forth) and white (the governmental body suppressing resistance to the invasion) are sharing a keyword action I have currently named Forum with the following rules text:
"Each player reveals the top card of their library. If you reveal the card with the highest converted mana cost, look at the top three cards of your library and rearrange them in any order."
As it stands, Forum is readily comparable to Lorwyn and Mordingtide's Clash mechanic. Both mechanics reveal the top cards of players' libraries and reward revealing the card with the highest converted mana cost. Both also create opportunities for small card filtering. However, Clash essentially allows both players to scry 1, while Forum can only benefit the triggering player and does nothing inherently if the triggering player loses. Clashing functions more as a randomly determined kicker to spells instead of its own reward, while most of the cards designed with Forum instead assume card filtering is its own reward.
Assuming the mechanic doesn't need any changes, I'm happy with how it's been integrated into the rest of the set. All colors have access to scrying at common, but blue moreso as per existing distribution of the mechanic, and checking the top card of libraries synergizes with both blue and white's ability to place opponents' cards back on top of libraries. I also think the mechanic is flavorfully accurate as a representation of competing ideas exchanged in public meeting places.
My worries with Forum are as follows, and I would appreciate any feedback:
- Is the payoff for "winning" a forum too large or too small?
- Is winning a forum a reward on its own, or should there be payoffs for winning like there are for winning clashes? What about payoffs for losing?
- Is rearranging the top of your library with a forum meaningful enough to build around?
- Is it a problem that winning a forum makes winning future forums easier?
. Also, Bolas must be killed.