An strange idea came to me as I was reading over GDS2 critiques (inspired by Penumbra's faction problem).
<Guild> Fealty (When you cast this spell, if you haven't joined any guild, you may join the <Guild>)
It's a little tricky rules wise (but it can be done), but easy to grok. At the beginning of the game, you're haven't joined any of the guilds. Whenever you cast a Fealty card, you may choose to join that guild. Once you've chosen a guild, you're in there for the duration and can't join any other guilds. If you can think of a clearer wording that gets the idea across better, please share.
Anyway, cards would have bonuses for being part of their guild. For example, you can make Silent Stalker unblockable by joining the Dimir, but once you do, you can't draw a card from Appeal Denied.
Silent Stalker 2UU
Creature - Human Rogue
Dimir Fealty (When you cast this spell, if you haven't joined any guild, you may join the Dimir.)
Silent Stalker is unblockable as long as you have joined the Dimir.
3/2
Appeal Denied2UU
Instant
Azorus Fealty (When you cast this spell, if you haven't joined any guild, you may join the Azorus.)
Counter target spell. If you have joined the Azorus, draw a card.
and in a cute little twist (the second set extension),
Skullcracker5R
Creature - Minotaur
Boros or Grull Fealty (When you cast this spell, if you haven't joined any guild, you may join either the Boros or the Grull.)
Skullcracker has first strike as long as you have joined the Boros.
Skullcracker gets +3/+0 as long as you have joined the Grull.
4/1
Guildless Anarchist3RR
Creature - Human Wizard
When Guildless Anarchist enters the battlefield, you may return target sorcery card from your graveyard to your hand. If you haven't joined any guild, add RRRto your mana pool.
2/2
The anarchist is too strong, as in any format outside of its block it is ridiculous compared to Anarchist for no drawback.
This... actually sounds interesting to me. It's a very literal and straightforward approach to "choosing sides" in gameplay, and takes the variants that were used for the Alara prerelease and Scars of Mirrodin gameday and integrates them into normal play. You aren't forbidden from using off-guild cards, but they will be less efficient if you do... very interesting.
I think this would play better with fewer factions... 10 is a lot and would fracture limited pretty poorly. It would be better with three or four maybe?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Can we have Megiddo removed from the forum forever please?
i'm pretty sure i can find your ***** online within 3 minutes
Yeah, not necessarily with the guilds, but in a future block with multiple factions this could be a great way to implement the multiple sides of the conflict.
That said, I'd prefer a more setting-neutral terminology:
NAME loyalty (As you cast this spell, if you aren't loyal to a faction, you may swear loyalty to NAME.)
As long as you are loyal to NAME, EFFECT.
Nah, emblems are only used to facilitate ongoing abilities that don't work otherwise. This could be done without them easily, just by adding "loyalty" as a new part of the rules.
Also, I'm loving that avatar.
e: Also:
Unshackle R
Instant
Each player gains control of all permanents he or she owns.
Each player who is loyal to a faction loses his or her loyalty.
I like how 'Loyalty' fits with the Planeswalker card idea as well. If a planeswalker is loyal to you, why cant you (A planeswalker) be loyal to someone else?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Each year that passes rings you inwardly with memory and might. Wield your heart, and the world will tremble."
"Alligience symbols" might be an interesting promotional thing, but wouldn't be needed for gameplay. Swearing loyalty is something that will probably be pretty easy to remember.
Also, it creates interesting situations if you decide to put cards from multiple factions in your deck. Do you swear loyalty for the first spell you cast, to get the strongest effect off the bat? Or do you wait so you can swear loyalty to get the most out of a different spell down the road?
Wouldn't this be better implemented with the use of emblems?
Or perhaps a new card type that functions in the command zone?
Dimir Fealty
Faction - Dimir (Special)
Join Faction (When you have joined this faction you cannot join any other as long as Dimir Fealty is in the command zone.)
Whenever you play a spell, target player puts the top card of his or her library into his or her graveyard.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"You were lucky Death was here to save you this time!"
Why? What does a card in the command zone do that memory doesn't?
Emblems don't exist to give you a reminder of ongoing effects. You're allowed to take notes during play, so players have always had ways to keep track of them. Emblems only exist in order to facilitate ongoing effects that don't work without them, such as Venser's or Koth's ultimates. They shouldn't be used outside of those cases, with the exception of Elspeth Knight-Errant, which only has it to look consistent with Koth and Venser, due to the unusual properties of indestructibility.
Why? What does a card in the command zone do that memory doesn't?
Emblems don't exist to give you a reminder of ongoing effects. You're allowed to take notes during play, so players have always had ways to keep track of them. Emblems only exist in order to facilitate ongoing effects that don't work without them, such as Venser's or Koth's ultimates. They shouldn't be used outside of those cases, with the exception of Elspeth Knight-Errant, which only has it to look consistent with Koth and Venser, due to the unusual properties of indestructibility.
Well not emblems but I like the idea of faction cards.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"You were lucky Death was here to save you this time!"
Really like the idea...seems like new design space! would like to see a set of commons using it more extensively.
I don't think having it TOO extensively would be good for draft. I'd want to be able to draft a deck around one faction, so having plenty of unaffiliated cards is crucial. Too many cards that need you to be aligned and it would be a problem.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Can we have Megiddo removed from the forum forever please?
i'm pretty sure i can find your ***** online within 3 minutes
Promotional stuff featuring faction symbols would be fine, yeah. But not as something that exists as part of the rules... they should be a strictly optional "bling" kind of thing.
You wouldn't want to have too many affiliated groups in a set, or else there are too many loyalty cards to have to work around. Five factions would be plenty, I think, each one in a color pair. Though that starts to get a little too close to Ravnica for my liking... but a number not divisible by five could end up being too unbalanced? Maybe four if the colors could be worked out properly.
Me too... I've got plans for a GUB deck that abuses all sorts of counters... graft, persist, infect, proliferate... gonna be sooo fun...
But yeah. Tri-color factions means that each color will have three different "loyalties" you can align yourself with when playing those spells. That seem fine to me, especially if it's weighted so that the "center" color of each wedge gets more loyalty spells than the other two. So, if you're playing black as your main color, you'd be pushed strongest towards aligning with the BGW faction, but you could "splash" black cards from the WBR and GUB groups without getting their bonus effects.
I agree with everyone that 10 is way too many and that four or five would be a much better number, but I'm not sure wedge-themed-factions are the way to go. If you have wedge themes, you've got to have wedge-colored cards and the faction theme doesn't seem like it would play well with a multicolored theme. One kind of restriction is fun, but two is obsessive. People should build the "X-faction deck", not the "Oros deck"
The Remnants of Ara'al people did an excellent job making the "Oros shard", but I think this set should go in a different direction when we make the "X faction"
Instead, how would people feel about four-colored factions (it's the Nephilim)? Focus heavy on the two central colors and less-so in the two fringe colors.
For example, take the WUBR faction (let's call them the Ravenclaw faction) We print more Ravenclaw cards in U and B, but still include a respectable number in W and R. This way, you can build the obvious UB Ravenclaw deck (especially in limited where mana fixing is limited), a WUB Ravenclaw deck, a UBR Ravenclaw deck, or if you're really bold with the mana a WUBR Ravenclaw deck. No matter which color combination you choose to focus on, you've still only got one restriction (use Ravenclaw cards) instead of two (use Ravenclaw cards and use wedge cards).
I like this idea as it is flavorful, but I doubt wizards would print these cards. As tribal accomplishes (nearly) the same thing. Also as someone mentioned earlier, 10 guild to join is a bit much. And once you join a guild, there's not much interaction you can do. Perhaps if you can opt to CHANGE guilds later in the game???
ALSO, I think this kind of idea would work REALLY well for MBS Phyrexian vs Mirran factions. Really amps up the choosing sides theme.
Just two factions doesn't really add much tension... it only ever matters where the strategies overlap. I guess there is some amount of overlap in limited with equipment and proliferate, but still not enough I think.
Basically swearing loyalty to a faction is part of your deckbuilding process, but if you do go ahead and use multiple factions' cards you are making important decisions each game, where you decide which of your cards you want to leave "powered down." By carefully making sure there is some overlap in popular limited and constructed archetypes, you increase the number of times such a situation is likely to occur. Like, for example, the Selesnya and Golgari in Ravnica limited. Both overlap in that they love to create tokens; if some of those token-making cards had a "swear loyalty" component then you could still use Selesnya token-makers in a Golgari deck, or vice versa, just with less benefit from doing so.
<Guild> Fealty (When you cast this spell, if you haven't joined any guild, you may join the <Guild>)
It's a little tricky rules wise (but it can be done), but easy to grok. At the beginning of the game, you're haven't joined any of the guilds. Whenever you cast a Fealty card, you may choose to join that guild. Once you've chosen a guild, you're in there for the duration and can't join any other guilds. If you can think of a clearer wording that gets the idea across better, please share.
Anyway, cards would have bonuses for being part of their guild. For example, you can make Silent Stalker unblockable by joining the Dimir, but once you do, you can't draw a card from Appeal Denied.
Silent Stalker 2UU
Creature - Human Rogue
Dimir Fealty (When you cast this spell, if you haven't joined any guild, you may join the Dimir.)
Silent Stalker is unblockable as long as you have joined the Dimir.
3/2
Appeal Denied 2UU
Instant
Azorus Fealty (When you cast this spell, if you haven't joined any guild, you may join the Azorus.)
Counter target spell. If you have joined the Azorus, draw a card.
and in a cute little twist (the second set extension),
Skullcracker 5R
Creature - Minotaur
Boros or Grull Fealty (When you cast this spell, if you haven't joined any guild, you may join either the Boros or the Grull.)
Skullcracker has first strike as long as you have joined the Boros.
Skullcracker gets +3/+0 as long as you have joined the Grull.
4/1
Guildless Anarchist 3RR
Creature - Human Wizard
When Guildless Anarchist enters the battlefield, you may return target sorcery card from your graveyard to your hand. If you haven't joined any guild, add RRRto your mana pool.
2/2
What do people think?
This... actually sounds interesting to me. It's a very literal and straightforward approach to "choosing sides" in gameplay, and takes the variants that were used for the Alara prerelease and Scars of Mirrodin gameday and integrates them into normal play. You aren't forbidden from using off-guild cards, but they will be less efficient if you do... very interesting.
R Citizen Cane (Feldon of the Third Path)
That said, I'd prefer a more setting-neutral terminology:
NAME loyalty (As you cast this spell, if you aren't loyal to a faction, you may swear loyalty to NAME.)
As long as you are loyal to NAME, EFFECT.
R Citizen Cane (Feldon of the Third Path)
Awesome.
Could we see some black cards that force you to join the associated group? (and un-associate you from any other group)
EDIT: Maybe this would be done with emblems, since wizards really likes that now.
Also, I'm loving that avatar.
e: Also:
Unshackle
R
Instant
Each player gains control of all permanents he or she owns.
Each player who is loyal to a faction loses his or her loyalty.
R Citizen Cane (Feldon of the Third Path)
Sieging Your Tower
Signature image by DNC.
Also, I noticed you had karkat a while ago...
"Alligience symbols" might be an interesting promotional thing, but wouldn't be needed for gameplay. Swearing loyalty is something that will probably be pretty easy to remember.
Also, it creates interesting situations if you decide to put cards from multiple factions in your deck. Do you swear loyalty for the first spell you cast, to get the strongest effect off the bat? Or do you wait so you can swear loyalty to get the most out of a different spell down the road?
R Citizen Cane (Feldon of the Third Path)
Reason number 23324590324 to have paper and pencil at hand.
Or perhaps a new card type that functions in the command zone?
Dimir Fealty
Faction - Dimir (Special)
Join Faction (When you have joined this faction you cannot join any other as long as Dimir Fealty is in the command zone.)
Whenever you play a spell, target player puts the top card of his or her library into his or her graveyard.
Emblems don't exist to give you a reminder of ongoing effects. You're allowed to take notes during play, so players have always had ways to keep track of them. Emblems only exist in order to facilitate ongoing effects that don't work without them, such as Venser's or Koth's ultimates. They shouldn't be used outside of those cases, with the exception of Elspeth Knight-Errant, which only has it to look consistent with Koth and Venser, due to the unusual properties of indestructibility.
R Citizen Cane (Feldon of the Third Path)
Well not emblems but I like the idea of faction cards.
I don't think having it TOO extensively would be good for draft. I'd want to be able to draft a deck around one faction, so having plenty of unaffiliated cards is crucial. Too many cards that need you to be aligned and it would be a problem.
You wouldn't want to have too many affiliated groups in a set, or else there are too many loyalty cards to have to work around. Five factions would be plenty, I think, each one in a color pair. Though that starts to get a little too close to Ravnica for my liking... but a number not divisible by five could end up being too unbalanced? Maybe four if the colors could be worked out properly.
R Citizen Cane (Feldon of the Third Path)
The percentage would have to be determined by playtesting, but 50/50 is a good jumping off point.
R Citizen Cane (Feldon of the Third Path)
I believe enemy colors were left out of Alara and could be used?
R Citizen Cane (Feldon of the Third Path)
I meant to say that (honestly) but you got the idea.
I haven't played EDH before and am looking foward to trying it out.
But yeah. Tri-color factions means that each color will have three different "loyalties" you can align yourself with when playing those spells. That seem fine to me, especially if it's weighted so that the "center" color of each wedge gets more loyalty spells than the other two. So, if you're playing black as your main color, you'd be pushed strongest towards aligning with the BGW faction, but you could "splash" black cards from the WBR and GUB groups without getting their bonus effects.
R Citizen Cane (Feldon of the Third Path)
The Remnants of Ara'al people did an excellent job making the "Oros shard", but I think this set should go in a different direction when we make the "X faction"
Instead, how would people feel about four-colored factions (it's the Nephilim)? Focus heavy on the two central colors and less-so in the two fringe colors.
For example, take the WUBR faction (let's call them the Ravenclaw faction) We print more Ravenclaw cards in U and B, but still include a respectable number in W and R. This way, you can build the obvious UB Ravenclaw deck (especially in limited where mana fixing is limited), a WUB Ravenclaw deck, a UBR Ravenclaw deck, or if you're really bold with the mana a WUBR Ravenclaw deck. No matter which color combination you choose to focus on, you've still only got one restriction (use Ravenclaw cards) instead of two (use Ravenclaw cards and use wedge cards).
ALSO, I think this kind of idea would work REALLY well for MBS Phyrexian vs Mirran factions. Really amps up the choosing sides theme.
Basically swearing loyalty to a faction is part of your deckbuilding process, but if you do go ahead and use multiple factions' cards you are making important decisions each game, where you decide which of your cards you want to leave "powered down." By carefully making sure there is some overlap in popular limited and constructed archetypes, you increase the number of times such a situation is likely to occur. Like, for example, the Selesnya and Golgari in Ravnica limited. Both overlap in that they love to create tokens; if some of those token-making cards had a "swear loyalty" component then you could still use Selesnya token-makers in a Golgari deck, or vice versa, just with less benefit from doing so.
R Citizen Cane (Feldon of the Third Path)