Overanalyzing Magic Cards

Throughout my journey with Magic the Gathering I noticed that there are certain cards that attract my attention, until I develop some kind of obsession with them. I started wondering why that is, what exactly it was that I found so endearing of these cards. So, I started to analyze them in an attempt to find out what great design is. The first thing I realized is, that it is a very subjective opinion, since for some cards part of the reason I am attracted to them is simply because their artwork is sick or their name sounds cool. Another thing is; I seem to have a bias towards black and green cards. But with those subjective thoughts out of the way I wanted to share with you my favourite magic cards and ponder about their design.

previous arrowprevious arrow
Slide

Plarg, Dean of Chaos / Augusta Dean of Order
The dichotomy between chaos and order as forces, that are shaping our world has always been a fascination of me. That’s why I was quite intrigued seeing a doublefaced card with the names Dean of Chaos and of Order, respectively. Unfortunately, they didn’t quite satisfy my hope for an intriguing depiction of the two forces.

First, obviously chaos is the perfect word for red as is order for white. The red/white combination is an aggressive one, where one finds oneself with a lot of cheap creatures that want to attack.
The dean of order is an interesting top end that buffs these creatures according to what the situation needs – more power to finish a job or vigilance to sneak some damage through while leaving some blockers.
I understand that this set is about a school but I can’t but imagine a military commander sorting out the ranks of his soldiers. So, being a dean already feels a bit off for her ability, but other than that I think the ability represents an interesting approach to order.
If we turn our attention to Plarg, however, things start getting disappointing. The one thing I really like is the name and the artwork. But what’s up with his abilities? Two questions: How do they convey chaos? And why are they so weak? Oh, and a third one: Why aren’t they aggressive?

With weak I mean slow.
Rummaging has no impact on the board at all, and the five mana ability might be doing well for a flooded aggro deck but if your aggro deck is flooding you have other problems. Worse than his impact on board, slow is the last thing I associate with chaos. Even if they were somehow faster, his abilities don’t affect the board in a chaotic way.

But how can we represent chaos in an interesting way? I’m not a huge fan of random effects, although I also don’t hate them, but I think chaos presents a great opportunity to use randomness. An idea I had, was that Plarg could deal 3 damage to three randomly selected targets whenever he attacks (only one damage each). The targets are random, thus causing chaos in attacking and blocking (In contrast to Augusta). Then the second ability would say that whenever a permanent you control gets non-combat damaged, you may draw a card. Just like that you would have an aggressive card-advantage card, that represents chaos, and might be interesting to play with.

next arrownext arrow

Colour Identity

Of course, in MTG the colour pie plays an important, even baseline, role in the design.

  • Flavour
    • Each colour represents certain ideas and concepts. They are quite flexible and sometimes can overlap, but generally and briefly I would associate…
      • White with order and masses
      • Blue with the search for knowledge and perfectionism
      • Black with ambition and sacrifices
      • Red with aggression and emotion
      • Green with nature and might
  • Strategy
    • To each colour belongs a more or less distinct playstyle. Again, the borders are fuzzy and there is some variety between the different sets but generally applies:
      • White: Aggression with many small threats
      • Blue: Card Advantage
      • Black: Removal
      • Red: Aggression with small threats and non-creature spells
      • Green: Ramp and aggression with big threats

A card design therefore should follow these ground rules, to not confuse the players and provide some orientation. But fitting into the colour pie is also important for a card, to make sense in a deck. For example, a red card that draws two cards and does nothing else, might not be played at all, because that would hurt the fast paced strategy of a red deck, while the same card in blue might be quite powerful.

Play fun

If it isn’t fun, why bother?

– Reggie Fils-Aimé

A great design for a card should make it interesting to play.

A creature that is only strong and has no abilities, is boring. It sits on the battlefield until it is removed, or it wins the game. On the other end of the spectrum, we have overpowered cards, which are maybe fun for me to play, but not fun for my opponent to play against. This too is faulty design, since it reduces the overall fun, the players have playing the game.

Complex abilities and effects on the card enrich the game.

Choice is the keyword here. Does the card open up more options to my disposal? Does it add to the choices of my opponent? Even better: Does it create an interaction between me and the opponent? A great example for this is Atris, Oracle of Half-Truths, that let’s the opponent divide the top three cards of my library into two staples, one of them face up, the other face down. I then can choose which of the staple I want to take into my hand, and which I want to put into the graveyard. It provides a little mini game within the game.

Choices come in many forms. Maybe a card creates a choice in every game, like Atris, or there is not a lot of choice in the situation one uses it, but it’s versatile to be of use in different situations. This makes the card more interesting to play with.

“Ludonarrative Harmony”

Now we enter the realm of “flavour”. Only mechanics with no context, would make it a pretty grey game. Luckily MTG tries to make the mechanics convey an idea, an action.

  • Generally, one can say that
    • instants and sorceries convey actions or events
    • Artifacts convey objects
    • Enchantments represent the modification of the environment or the creature
    • Creatures convey creatures and their abilities the creature’s actions.

The better the mechanics fit the ideas the card tries to convey the better the design. Let’s take Etrata, the Silencer for example. Her ability let’s her hit the opponent, without being blocked, then she exiles a creature from the opponent. Having done so, you have to shuffle her back into your library. Etrata is an Assassin. She slips into the opponent’s stronghold, without being seen, eliminates her target and then vanishes and stays under for a while. The mechanics excellently represent her actions.

There is even a level deeper to this. Although rare, truly great design does not only let the mechanic represent an action but lets them tell a story. Brutal Cathar is a white creature, that exiles another creature when entering the battlefield. From the MTG story Cathar’s are some religious order that protects citizens from monsters. Brutal Cathar is thus deeply ingrained in the theme of order. But if a player doesn’t play a spell during their turn, it turns night, and Brutal Cathar turns into a red werewolf that deals damage when targeted in its blind rage. Brutal Cathar tells a tragic, ironic story.

Play Feel

Derived from the Ludonarrative Harmony, there is a step further from mechanics representing ideas. I call play feel the way the mechanics make the player feel. Ideally, they feel like doing what the mechanics represent. Let me give you the example of Cling to Dust. The card lets you exile a card from a graveyard. If it’s a creature card, you gain three lives, if it’s a non-creature, you draw a card. That means if you play against an aggressive deck, you find yourself trying to survive while stabilizing the board. With those three lives, you do feel like you are clinging to dust.

Iconography

Lastly, Name of the card, and its image play a huge part in informing my opinion on a card’s design. I think this is the most subjective category on here. Especially the image, but I think some thoughts on it can be shared objectively.

  • Image:
    • The image should fit to the mechanics. Goldspan Dragon for example has beautiful art. It has also the ability to create a treasure token when it attacks. But its haste ability does not fit with the comfortably sitting and relaxing dragon on the image. Why is there no image of a dragon swooping through the air, while gold is falling from his wings? It would fit way better.
  • Name:
    • Approach of the Second Sun. Cling to dust. Those are iconic names. The name should not only fittingly describe what the card does, but also be easily memorable.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *