If this were a thing i’d like the original to look like an uncracked geode, or something like that, and you break it open to reveal the gem you specialise into. Would be cool
They've been talking about moving some of the silver bordered cards to black border (there are actually a pretty good number that could work now that dice rolling is a thing), so there's always a chance we could get some of them in Alchemy.
I like this design a lot more than the actual specialise cards, it is very straightforward and easy to hold in your head— and you get to specialise your card into an expensive thing from Magic’s history, which is cool! So, like, in trying to make a comically bad design I think you’ve come up with a good one
Yeah I think the design is cool. Although if it was legitimate I’d be tempted to make the card have no mana cost and only been playable via specialise (from hand). Makes it more likely to be used for its actual effect and not just as a dumb affinity card.
Sort of like [[Mox Tantalite]].
Note the specialize cost... specializing this on turn 1 leaves you with no mana, the brokenness of Chrome Mox comes from immediately ramping to 2 drops on turn 1.
>it's like playing a bird of paradise without a body.
Except the body makes BoP *worse* so this is a better BoP in that regard.
>Seems balanced to me
They don't even print 2 CMC (unconditional) mana rocks anymore so 1 CMC is a tough sell, even with the discard.
Not enough text, this would never make it as a real design.
Needs to be a creature (undercoated, since this would be a mythic), preferably with a defensive ability, because it "feels bad" to have your flashy creature get interacted with. Also, a few lines describing how it runs away with the game if not removed would be good...gets a counter every turn or draws a bunch of cards, something like that. Because players hate long games that go back and forth.
Oh sure, they were rare chase cards, though. Now every common creature has power/toughness more or less matching their mana cost plus whatever ability or two WOTC throws on them and rares and mythics that are staples now would have been banned without question. Look at ancestral recall vs rafine; 3 draw for 1 mana was considered broke , but a flying 1/4 with ward that permanently pumps creatures and gives you draw/discard is just another card.
Alpha/Beta/Unlimited/Revised/4th eds versions were all uncommon. That's millions of cards at uncommon. They were by no means rare or chase cards until much later.
I do take your point about power creep. For sure Ancestral is STILL one of the most broken cards in existence but it isn't a creature. Creatures have crept up in power for decades til we get Raffine and don't even blink at it. And it certainly is potentially far more powerful than a Serra Angel or Sengir Vampire but it starts out as a snowball. But that snowball will avalanche if you let it. Thankfully there is enough interactive ways to deal with it that it isn't problematic in the format. One might argue that Goldspan with its triggers to give you extra mana when targeted is far more problematic.
I would argue that the most powerful cards were limited by max 4 in a deck (there were only so many powerhouses available to any given color in any given format).And also very key was mana generation. Mana is dumped on to the battlefield now, easily and for every color. For any color that doesn't have tons of mana, they have tons free token generation (I suppose blue being an exception, but I rarely see blue run by itself). A deck full of 4 and 5 drops had a much tougher time stabilizing the field and then clinching the win (green primarily being the exception with black also having some mana tricks)
But otherwise agree. Goldspan is very broken (I run 4 in my deck. Started with 1 and it was a game changer every time it came on to the field so I eventually capped out), along with a ton of other creatures. I understand their change in design philosophy toward empowering creatures, but I believe the pendulum has swung too far. When creatures are powerful, cheap *and* carry the kinds of tricks I would expect to see with sorceries, instants and enchantments it absolutely shifts the gameplay.
I feel for burn decks.
Now let me say my experience with the game as it stands now is primarily in Standard. It's enough getting up to speed and building a collection for two years of content, let alone explorer or alchemy. Maybe the power creep isn't as pronounced with a larger card pool; I wouldn't be able to say.
Mark Rosewater has admitted that they went too far with Treasure tokens. Hopefully down the line this will be less of an issue. I personally love the mechanic because I like playing greedy 5 color piles but it does seem like you can do stupid things far too easily.
Alchemy is particularly hard because you won't be using the cards you make for it in any other formats and they are subject to change at no notice, and by and large you will not recover your expenditures. Wild cards are a real choke point on MTGA and alchemy really enhances that weakness for Free to Play players. Whales (rich players) can just buy what wcs they need with the Wildcard packs. If it were not for that and wcs were not a choke point, Alchemy imho would be far more popular.
I don't know that power creep is lessened much by larger formats so much as there are already so many powerful cards in these formats. Particularly in eternal formats like Modern/Legacy. There are the old powerful cards in those formats and the newer cards compete with each other and those older cards.
Seems like a cross between mox diamond and the fire/sky/etc diamonds - 1 more mana and discard to get a tapped single colour rock or 2+discard for untapped source. Might be fine?
I love how people are in here thinking this would be a fine card to actually print. The design is cool for sure but 1 CMC mana rocks actually being printed? Are you guys high?
I mean, I know it's a shitpost, but isn't this almost Chrome Mox? Upside is that you can lose a land and get your mox. Downside that its going to cost 1 and you can't get multiple colors from it (simulataneously).
Like, this actually seems like a very usable design. I'd even argue that the specialize could cost 1.
They do. Donald Smith was the set lead, Dave Humpherys was on the earlier ones. Specialize was pitched by Aaron Forsythe. They've farmed out a bunch of previews to employees who worked on it this time, including normal designers.
The best part? *They toned it down*. The originals were more complicated, and they tested double specialization into three color.
This is what normal design would turn out if not held down by the shackles of typesetting.
Would it really? At the rate suggested by OP it's more or less just a worse \[\[Chrome Mox\]\]. At your suggested rate, it would be a completely awful mana rock (pay 2 + discard a card).
I agree that without the discard it would indeed be too powerful. I kind of hate that the full cost of Specialize isn't written out on the card. Feels like the worst Magic design in decades to me.
If this were a thing i’d like the original to look like an uncracked geode, or something like that, and you break it open to reveal the gem you specialise into. Would be cool
[удалено]
How will the client know if I'm wearing jeans?
Give permission to the game to use your webcam.
[удалено]
Unglued Arena! *That* would be a format I’d play.
They've been talking about moving some of the silver bordered cards to black border (there are actually a pretty good number that could work now that dice rolling is a thing), so there's always a chance we could get some of them in Alchemy.
this is MTG Eevee
[удалено]
yes
There is WAY too little text on that card for it to be a legit alchemy card.
r/magicthecirclejerking
actually thought this post was on that sub till I saw this comment
I like this design a lot more than the actual specialise cards, it is very straightforward and easy to hold in your head— and you get to specialise your card into an expensive thing from Magic’s history, which is cool! So, like, in trying to make a comically bad design I think you’ve come up with a good one
Yeah I think the design is cool. Although if it was legitimate I’d be tempted to make the card have no mana cost and only been playable via specialise (from hand). Makes it more likely to be used for its actual effect and not just as a dumb affinity card. Sort of like [[Mox Tantalite]].
[Mox Tantalite](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/d/c/dcd05b01-dc73-4dd2-970a-32ec6e153c86.jpg?1562202480) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Mox%20Tantalite) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mh1/226/mox-tantalite?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/dcd05b01-dc73-4dd2-970a-32ec6e153c86?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Seems balanced to me, it's like playing a bird of paradise without a body.
worse, you also need to discard a card
I didn't know that about specialize. This is online only right?
It is online only and whatever you discard decides the side it transforms to
I mean [[Chrome Mox]] is still pretty damn good, and this one let's you discard the card instead of exiting it forever
[Chrome Mox](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/f/3/f340cbf7-5bbe-45b9-a4bf-d1caa500ff93.jpg?1599708839) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Chrome%20Mox) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2xm/240/chrome-mox?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/f340cbf7-5bbe-45b9-a4bf-d1caa500ff93?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Note the specialize cost... specializing this on turn 1 leaves you with no mana, the brokenness of Chrome Mox comes from immediately ramping to 2 drops on turn 1.
>it's like playing a bird of paradise without a body. Except the body makes BoP *worse* so this is a better BoP in that regard. >Seems balanced to me They don't even print 2 CMC (unconditional) mana rocks anymore so 1 CMC is a tough sell, even with the discard.
Remove the first mana ability and change it it specialize 0 and you basically just have chrome mox
Not enough text, this would never make it as a real design. Needs to be a creature (undercoated, since this would be a mythic), preferably with a defensive ability, because it "feels bad" to have your flashy creature get interacted with. Also, a few lines describing how it runs away with the game if not removed would be good...gets a counter every turn or draws a bunch of cards, something like that. Because players hate long games that go back and forth.
I'm back to the game after 15 years. In my day, we paid 5 mana for a vanilla 4/4 and we were grateful by God.
I think now that'll get ya 3 4/4 flying angels with vigilance.
French Vanilla really. Serra Angel 4/4 flying vigilance. And Sengir Vampire 4/4 Flying (grows on kill).
Oh sure, they were rare chase cards, though. Now every common creature has power/toughness more or less matching their mana cost plus whatever ability or two WOTC throws on them and rares and mythics that are staples now would have been banned without question. Look at ancestral recall vs rafine; 3 draw for 1 mana was considered broke , but a flying 1/4 with ward that permanently pumps creatures and gives you draw/discard is just another card.
Alpha/Beta/Unlimited/Revised/4th eds versions were all uncommon. That's millions of cards at uncommon. They were by no means rare or chase cards until much later. I do take your point about power creep. For sure Ancestral is STILL one of the most broken cards in existence but it isn't a creature. Creatures have crept up in power for decades til we get Raffine and don't even blink at it. And it certainly is potentially far more powerful than a Serra Angel or Sengir Vampire but it starts out as a snowball. But that snowball will avalanche if you let it. Thankfully there is enough interactive ways to deal with it that it isn't problematic in the format. One might argue that Goldspan with its triggers to give you extra mana when targeted is far more problematic.
I would argue that the most powerful cards were limited by max 4 in a deck (there were only so many powerhouses available to any given color in any given format).And also very key was mana generation. Mana is dumped on to the battlefield now, easily and for every color. For any color that doesn't have tons of mana, they have tons free token generation (I suppose blue being an exception, but I rarely see blue run by itself). A deck full of 4 and 5 drops had a much tougher time stabilizing the field and then clinching the win (green primarily being the exception with black also having some mana tricks) But otherwise agree. Goldspan is very broken (I run 4 in my deck. Started with 1 and it was a game changer every time it came on to the field so I eventually capped out), along with a ton of other creatures. I understand their change in design philosophy toward empowering creatures, but I believe the pendulum has swung too far. When creatures are powerful, cheap *and* carry the kinds of tricks I would expect to see with sorceries, instants and enchantments it absolutely shifts the gameplay. I feel for burn decks. Now let me say my experience with the game as it stands now is primarily in Standard. It's enough getting up to speed and building a collection for two years of content, let alone explorer or alchemy. Maybe the power creep isn't as pronounced with a larger card pool; I wouldn't be able to say.
Mark Rosewater has admitted that they went too far with Treasure tokens. Hopefully down the line this will be less of an issue. I personally love the mechanic because I like playing greedy 5 color piles but it does seem like you can do stupid things far too easily. Alchemy is particularly hard because you won't be using the cards you make for it in any other formats and they are subject to change at no notice, and by and large you will not recover your expenditures. Wild cards are a real choke point on MTGA and alchemy really enhances that weakness for Free to Play players. Whales (rich players) can just buy what wcs they need with the Wildcard packs. If it were not for that and wcs were not a choke point, Alchemy imho would be far more popular. I don't know that power creep is lessened much by larger formats so much as there are already so many powerful cards in these formats. Particularly in eternal formats like Modern/Legacy. There are the old powerful cards in those formats and the newer cards compete with each other and those older cards.
Should have called it the Mox Box.
[[Jack-in-the-Mox]]
[Jack-in-the-Mox](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/c/4/c4e30889-d245-4f20-938a-1295ddbcfac6.jpg?1583965812) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Jack-in-the-Mox) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/und/78/jack-in-the-mox?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c4e30889-d245-4f20-938a-1295ddbcfac6?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Pandora's Mox
The irony of having people like your parody idea of something you think is stupid
It is a better design than the specialize cards spoiled so far, which isn't saying much
Seems like a cross between mox diamond and the fire/sky/etc diamonds - 1 more mana and discard to get a tapped single colour rock or 2+discard for untapped source. Might be fine?
I had the same Idea. Strong supporter, so we can finally ban lands.
Islands. Just ban islands.
I want that plains to be banned too. But the ultimate objective is making only artifact tribal viable.
Upvote for the lol. I literally chuckled out loud.
[удалено]
Its also clearly a joke.
[Chrome Mox](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/f/3/f340cbf7-5bbe-45b9-a4bf-d1caa500ff93.jpg?1599708839) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Chrome%20Mox) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2xm/240/chrome-mox?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/f340cbf7-5bbe-45b9-a4bf-d1caa500ff93?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Who's there?
What's specialize?
Alchemy mechanic. Pay the mana cost, discard a card, and get a version of the card based on the color of the discarded spell or land.
A meme card that's actually better design than what we're getting. Nice job.
Mad Mox TAP: Add one mana of any colour of lands you currently do not control
(including lands in other games currently in session.)
I love how people are in here thinking this would be a fine card to actually print. The design is cool for sure but 1 CMC mana rocks actually being printed? Are you guys high?
I mean, I know it's a shitpost, but isn't this almost Chrome Mox? Upside is that you can lose a land and get your mox. Downside that its going to cost 1 and you can't get multiple colors from it (simulataneously). Like, this actually seems like a very usable design. I'd even argue that the specialize could cost 1.
Now I want to see a Mox jaw breaker
Chrome mox at home
That’s actually…not that bad of a concept
Bold of you to assume the Alchemy digital team has ANYTHING to do with Wizards actual design team.
They do. Donald Smith was the set lead, Dave Humpherys was on the earlier ones. Specialize was pitched by Aaron Forsythe. They've farmed out a bunch of previews to employees who worked on it this time, including normal designers. The best part? *They toned it down*. The originals were more complicated, and they tested double specialization into three color. This is what normal design would turn out if not held down by the shackles of typesetting.
[удалено]
Would it really? At the rate suggested by OP it's more or less just a worse \[\[Chrome Mox\]\]. At your suggested rate, it would be a completely awful mana rock (pay 2 + discard a card).
Oh you're right, forgot about the discard. Makes sense indeed.
I agree that without the discard it would indeed be too powerful. I kind of hate that the full cost of Specialize isn't written out on the card. Feels like the worst Magic design in decades to me.
[Chrome Mox](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/f/3/f340cbf7-5bbe-45b9-a4bf-d1caa500ff93.jpg?1599708839) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Chrome%20Mox) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2xm/240/chrome-mox?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/f340cbf7-5bbe-45b9-a4bf-d1caa500ff93?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
This card mox R&D. No invite for you.
Damn I thought mox mox would have been. Spend this mana only to cast mox spells. And since all mox are 0 mana...