Instead of doing my homework (I'm 39 and still in college - one day I'll finish), I decided to write up a brief but impassioned plea for everyone out there on the fence about whether to choose Land or Enchantment.
While I'm not much more than a Timmy, I do have to say after playing the game for over a year now that I feel I have as much a stake in this as anyone. There are good arguments being made for both sides of this debate. The lands camp wants us to believe that we can get a pretty sweet land out of this process. The enchantment camp sees things differently, voicing their opinions that enchantments are more exciting when it comes to design. Arguments for and against are raging on Twitter, with a seeming slant as of this writing towards Lands (at least by some of the bigger names in the game).
Far be it from me to say something negative, as I feel I'm still an infant when it comes to this game. But friends, Romans, countrymen - the Spikes are WRONG.
Voting land is simply a mistake. The reasoning is as plain as the nose on your face. I'll outline it for you.
Voting Land
If you're in the Land Camp, you're hoping for what will amount to being a Rare, even Mythic card. You're looking to create a Land that can see play across all formats. You're hoping to create the next Cavern of Souls, a cool Wasteland, or something with an interesting and punishing mechanic.
That idea itself isn't wrong. Rather, the end result of voting for Land is why I will not follow that road, regardless of who says it. Here's the reason being on #teamland is wrong - it's boring. The number of design choices is significantly smaller. For one thing, there will be no arguments or votes likely over casting cost, nor will there be much argument about color (colorless is the obvious path to take). The process will be faster and the end result will either be a card that is too powerful or gets nerfed by WotC. In the end - it will be less fun for those participating in the process.
Let's face it. When it comes to non-basic Lands, when the game needs something to balance it the Designers come up with it. Lands, even non-basic ones, aren't quite as complicated or special as one of the other choices.
I don't know about you, but I want to have fun. We're collectively designing a card, but it's only ONE card. In a big block, that's 1 out of 250 or so cards. In a small block, it'd only be 1 out of 170 or so cards. If we're going to design something as a community, let's have some fun doing it.
Voting Enchantment
Being firmly in the Enchantment camp feels pretty swell. Enchantments are some of the most creative cards in the game. One of my favorite cards that illustrates this point is a recent edition - Ethereal Armor. A creative little card that does a tremendous amount when played correctly. What if we could create an Ethereal Armor that has a bit of Rancor thrown in for good measure (saving it from discards). Or adjust it to offer an additional protection or weakness?
Enchantments also allow for a bit more leeway in the rarity game. If you vote Land, as previously mentioned you'll end up with a Rare/Mythic. So while the card may be more powerful (unless it's a card like Thespian Stage which I still don't think is any good), it will be harder to acquire. An Enchantment though in this competition could easily end up being a Common or Uncommon. I don't know about you, but when I crack a pack after this card is released into the wild, I want to have a chance of finding it. The idea of opening up a pack and getting a fuzzy feeling from finding something I helped design is just one of the many reasons to vote Enchantment.
Need another reason? Let's look at it this way. Enchantments are more interesting from a design perspective. We'll get to argue about casting cost, flavor text, abilities, and more. Some of that will simply be moot if Land wins the day. Not that I don't love my copies of Cavern of Souls - but really, designing something like that is a 3-4 step process compared to a 6-8 step process. And folks, I want to get to participate in all aspects of this process.
Let's look at two more reasons before I close this out. I just jumped over to the page on Daily MTG where they announced the run-off poll. Two things struck me, almost simultaneously. First, LSV's Twitter post that, "...Lands are Sweet." I did mention that some big names are behind Team Lands. Great. Fine. I get it. But it doesn't mean they're right from a design perspective. I may only be a Timmy, but I have no difficulty calling out LSV on this. Voting Land will cheat everyone of the full design process. The other thing that jumped out and smacked me was results from the first poll. If you look at them as I do, here's what I think will happen. Those that voted Lands and Enchantments will likely not change their votes too much. But I think a huge percentage of those that chose Instant/Sorcery will move towards Enchantments in this run off. A good percentage of those that voted for creature should do the same. Artifacts is harder to predict (there may be a bit of a split there). My point here is this - Enchantments SHOULD get more of the recast votes.
Conclusion
Don't be swayed by one single person's Tweet, Tumblr or blog post on this. Read as many posts as you can before you make up your mind. I know I read at least 4 or 5 great posts, some from both sides.
The best part about his though is, in the end, there will be a clear winner to this debate (I love winners). That's us. Timmy, Johnny and Spike will all get something out of this design competition. I can't wait to see what we come up with.
...So long as it's an Enchantment!
Go Vote Now
I wrote up a blog post myself arguing in favor of lands, but I think some of your arguments have merit. For sure, there are more variables at play with enchantments. If you want to vote on more stuff, then by all means vote enchantment. I personally don't really care how many things I can vote on, I would prefer a more widely-played card.
ReplyDeleteI do disagree with you that the land will necessarily be a rare or mythic. I have a land in mind, and its text would be right at home at uncommon. Probably not common, but then again, how many nonbasic lands are common at all? But uncommon would be fine. And if you think that the public would come up with a common-worthy enchantment in YMTC, well I vehemently disagree. If enchantment wins, we are going to see some wild, wacky stuff.
Finally, one of my main arguments for land is that it has a higher chance of resulting in a card that people actually play. We don't need another Vanish into Memory.
Markdash - All good points, thanks for reading and posting a response. Do me a favor and retweet this, if for no other reason than to get different opinions out there. If you've already done so, than you have my thanks.
ReplyDeleteI actually have to disagree with markdash and go the other direction - while I think the land would definitely be rare/mythic, I think any enchantment will inevitably be too. To be honest, it seems more an abberation that Vanish Into Memory (which was a drastically different YMTC than the other two in many respects) was uncommon than that the other two were rare. I think whatever happens in YMTC4, the card is almost guaranteed to be rare. And you know what? That's Okay. I'll certainly crack a few box-- err, packs regardless, but if the card doesn't show up in a booster pack I open, that doesn't lessen the fact that it'll still be out there.
ReplyDeleteAnd the truth is, _interesting_ effects are just more likely to be rare than otherwise. I don't think it's coincidence that Forgotten Ancient and Crucible see a ton of play while Vanish into Memory has for all practical purposes done just that. So while I definitely think you make a pretty compelling case for enchantments on the 'tunable knobs' aspect, I don't know that rarity should (or will) come into it in any way shape or form.
Sstadnicki, I'm not so sure about the cost for the Enchantment ending up being a rare.
DeleteLook at it from this perspective. What makes a card a Common/Uncommon/Rare/Mythic? Is it not so much effect (although that is critical, I'll grant your point) but more weighed towards casting cost?
If that is in fact true, I'd argue we can easily end up with an Uncommon Enchantment - depending on where the process takes us and what WotC is eventually comfortable with. For an extra mana in the casting cost, a card could go from Rare to Uncommon - and maybe that's what the community wants. Of course, we want to not pay a lot for those wicked cool effects. But - if we have to pay a fair cost to get them, I don't think there is harm in it either.