@shadowknight1224 so I just havenāt had time lately to sit down and write up a full design skeleton starting with commons, but Iāve been thinking about Arcedge when I can anyway and these are two ideas that have no real business given that we donāt really know the base gameplay of the set, but Iām putting them out there anyway
first is the idea of pillars as a land subtype. The pillars are central to our world design so I think it makes sense to include lands to depict them, as youāve said since basically day one. But what does it mean to be a pillar? Hereās what I feel is my best take on it so far.
Pillar of Fire
Land -- Pillar (R)
Pillar of Fire enters the battlefield tapped with a number of pillar counters on it equal to the number of Pillars you control.
T: Add R.
3R, T: Pillar of Fire deals damage to any target equal to the number of pillar counters on it.
Pillars function together. So pillars are stronger when you play more of them. In a mono color deck this will peak at 4 counters on the last pillar you play which is an unlikely thing to happen in a game unless we include cards that can tutor out pillars. But if you add more pillars of different colors (this is a cycle with one in each color) then you can increase the odds of your later pillars being more powerful repeatable effects. Honestly I may be way off base on the costing here. Bighted Forge as a reference would say I am. Keldon Megaliths is perhaps closer though Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle is the best comparison I think with regard to power and the role of these lands in our world.Ā
Other problems I see are you either need to reprint the same pillars in the next set if you want that theme to carry through or else come up with a reason that you can make 5 new pillars for a total of 10 pillars even though only 5 physically exist in our world design. Iāve also considered a design for a colorless pillar that could add pillar counters (though that can become an artifact or something if itās a good idea) and a home pillar to help fix mana in a deck that wants to run a lot of pillars. Iām slightly inspired by a Gates deck Iāve been playing with GRN. But playing lots of gates naturally fixes your mana since they all tap for two colors. The pillars as Iāve designed them donāt, so getting the right mana is really swingy especially for a 5C deck. But I think the pillars donāt make sense as dual lands and that our whole home mana scheme gets messed up if you do a cycle of traditional tri-lands. Support cards--tutors, other fixing, etc--are probably the only fix here. We could make them all home lands but then that doesnāt encourage playing them in a 5C deck where you cram in as many pillars as you can grab.
Speaking of 5C, my second thought is just a seed of an idea but it comes from the questionĀ āCan we do something else with a 5C deck thanks to the nature of this set and the home mechanic?ā So typical 5C is a control deck that can run the best removal in any color and then plop down a late game threat or combo thatās color intensive (or have a small toolbox of the best threats in each color). But what if we had a card something like this:
Wandering Herder 1G
Creature -- Human Nomad (R)
Tap three untapped creatures you control: Choose three new home colors.
2/2
And the idea would be that the 5C human deck (or a variant of it) works by playing a particular wedge or arc in the early game to set up a combo in a different wedge or arc for the late game. So you would maybe have a Sultai control and tutoring setup then plop this guy down and sac it to pick new home colors and switch over to a Jeskai control finish. Like I said, just a seed of an idea. But itās certainly novel. And that would be enough for a Johnny, which is what I think this sort of card is for. Itās not a Spike tournament-level idea but it can be a fun puzzle to solve.
Also a tidbit; this card originally created Goat tokens since nomad relates directly to people who wandered in search of pasture for their livestock. Tapping three creatures is supposed to convey that same idea while simplifying what this card is doing and keeping focus on choosing new home colors, while also allowing you the potential to switch back. One issue I see with this deck idea is that if all your set up and control options are in a particular subset of three colors, thereās a really tough risk-reward assessment to switch to color options that turn those control cards into dead cards in hand or drawn. Thatās a major obstacle to considering this which means either you need the combo finisher to be that worthwhile and those control/tutors the best options to set it up OR make sure it isnāt impossible to switch back to your control/set up colors.