rst38
@rst38.bsky.social
I enjoy pretty much anything that has to do with Magic design and Magic limited.
𝐖𝐢𝐧𝐧𝐞𝐫 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐌𝐊𝐌 #𝐏𝟎𝐏𝟏 𝐂𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐞🏆
𝐖𝐢𝐧𝐧𝐞𝐫 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐌𝐊𝐌 #𝐏𝟎𝐏𝟏 𝐂𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐞🏆
The record of longest type line in number of characters still belongs to these three cards, with 49 characters each. (Brudiclad got errata'd to Phyrexian Artificer).
Leonardo comes closest, with a type line of 48 characters.
Leonardo comes closest, with a type line of 48 characters.
October 11, 2025 at 6:37 AM
The record of longest type line in number of characters still belongs to these three cards, with 49 characters each. (Brudiclad got errata'd to Phyrexian Artificer).
Leonardo comes closest, with a type line of 48 characters.
Leonardo comes closest, with a type line of 48 characters.
Donnie & April and Leonardo would also become only the second and third ever cards reaching a total of six supertypes, types, and/or subtypes, the only existing one so far being River Song.
Note that I'm not counting creature types gained via changeling.
Note that I'm not counting creature types gained via changeling.
October 11, 2025 at 6:37 AM
Donnie & April and Leonardo would also become only the second and third ever cards reaching a total of six supertypes, types, and/or subtypes, the only existing one so far being River Song.
Note that I'm not counting creature types gained via changeling.
Note that I'm not counting creature types gained via changeling.
If I'm not mistaken, Donny & April and Leonardo would become just the 10th and 11th cards with four subtypes.
Full list: scryfall.com/search?q=t%3...
Notably, the only other cards with four printed types are River Song and Druid of the Sacred Beaker (silver-bordered). Others gained via errata.
Full list: scryfall.com/search?q=t%3...
Notably, the only other cards with four printed types are River Song and Druid of the Sacred Beaker (silver-bordered). Others gained via errata.
October 11, 2025 at 6:37 AM
If I'm not mistaken, Donny & April and Leonardo would become just the 10th and 11th cards with four subtypes.
Full list: scryfall.com/search?q=t%3...
Notably, the only other cards with four printed types are River Song and Druid of the Sacred Beaker (silver-bordered). Others gained via errata.
Full list: scryfall.com/search?q=t%3...
Notably, the only other cards with four printed types are River Song and Druid of the Sacred Beaker (silver-bordered). Others gained via errata.
Two other good candidates for me because of format context.
I'm thinking there has to be a fun RG or BR deathtouch design that hasn't been made yet... Like a creature that deals 2 damage on ETB and has deathtouch as long as some condition is met.
I'm thinking there has to be a fun RG or BR deathtouch design that hasn't been made yet... Like a creature that deals 2 damage on ETB and has deathtouch as long as some condition is met.
October 7, 2025 at 8:52 PM
Two other good candidates for me because of format context.
I'm thinking there has to be a fun RG or BR deathtouch design that hasn't been made yet... Like a creature that deals 2 damage on ETB and has deathtouch as long as some condition is met.
I'm thinking there has to be a fun RG or BR deathtouch design that hasn't been made yet... Like a creature that deals 2 damage on ETB and has deathtouch as long as some condition is met.
Sticktwister lifelink is a beautiful way to balance the modes leveraging Black's tools in the color pie.
I think the design premise of Turbodrone is brilliant in the context of the EOE RW archetype, even if the card wasn't very good.
I think the design premise of Turbodrone is brilliant in the context of the EOE RW archetype, even if the card wasn't very good.
October 7, 2025 at 8:37 PM
Sticktwister lifelink is a beautiful way to balance the modes leveraging Black's tools in the color pie.
I think the design premise of Turbodrone is brilliant in the context of the EOE RW archetype, even if the card wasn't very good.
I think the design premise of Turbodrone is brilliant in the context of the EOE RW archetype, even if the card wasn't very good.
For anyone that might be interested (and somehow doesn't have enough with EOE!): Tomorrow I start previewing a custom set in the MSE discord server. You can also follow along the cards as they are previewed here: custom-magic.gitlab.io/custom-magic...
Here you have the teaser and a welcome card!
Here you have the teaser and a welcome card!
July 8, 2025 at 9:23 PM
For anyone that might be interested (and somehow doesn't have enough with EOE!): Tomorrow I start previewing a custom set in the MSE discord server. You can also follow along the cards as they are previewed here: custom-magic.gitlab.io/custom-magic...
Here you have the teaser and a welcome card!
Here you have the teaser and a welcome card!
I believe it would be "When", right? Avoids any potential misinterpretation of the reflexive trigger being a separate ability.
April 22, 2025 at 12:07 AM
I believe it would be "When", right? Avoids any potential misinterpretation of the reflexive trigger being a separate ability.
Ultimately though, mechanics aren’t black and white in this classification. Cycling for example would be somewhere between “producer” and “tool”; flashback, while "consumer" of graveyard, could also act as "producer" of a mechanic like flurry (precisely what Harmonize does in Tarkir: Dragonstorm).
April 8, 2025 at 4:23 PM
Ultimately though, mechanics aren’t black and white in this classification. Cycling for example would be somewhere between “producer” and “tool”; flashback, while "consumer" of graveyard, could also act as "producer" of a mechanic like flurry (precisely what Harmonize does in Tarkir: Dragonstorm).
To illustrate what I mean about increasing design space, you can consider Stampeding Scurryfoot from DFT versus Thought Shucker from BLB. The latter has a “Activate only once.” that we are not used to, especially at common, but the former feels natural because it’s standardized as a set mechanic.
April 8, 2025 at 4:23 PM
To illustrate what I mean about increasing design space, you can consider Stampeding Scurryfoot from DFT versus Thought Shucker from BLB. The latter has a “Activate only once.” that we are not used to, especially at common, but the former feels natural because it’s standardized as a set mechanic.
Rather, "tool" mechanics increase design space in a general manner. Unique card types like Battles, Sagas, and Rooms tend to belong here too.
April 8, 2025 at 4:23 PM
Rather, "tool" mechanics increase design space in a general manner. Unique card types like Battles, Sagas, and Rooms tend to belong here too.
Finally, there are mechanics that I call “tool” mechanics. For example, kicker, spree, and exhaust. These are like “producer” mechanics, but what they produce isn’t targeted at specific themes (outside of caring about the mechanic itself, like Roost of Drakes from ZNR).
April 8, 2025 at 4:23 PM
Finally, there are mechanics that I call “tool” mechanics. For example, kicker, spree, and exhaust. These are like “producer” mechanics, but what they produce isn’t targeted at specific themes (outside of caring about the mechanic itself, like Roost of Drakes from ZNR).
You need “consumer” mechanics to spice things up and introduce distinctive ways to interact with the “producer” mechanics. One of my favorite, seen in the recent Duskmourn set, is manifest dread with delirium. Manifest dread produces somewhat selective graveyard filling, and delirium consumes it.
April 8, 2025 at 4:23 PM
You need “consumer” mechanics to spice things up and introduce distinctive ways to interact with the “producer” mechanics. One of my favorite, seen in the recent Duskmourn set, is manifest dread with delirium. Manifest dread produces somewhat selective graveyard filling, and delirium consumes it.
For example, fabricate brings counters, artifacts, go wide, and sacrifice synergies all in one.
In my experience, however, if you overdo with “producer” mechanics, you risk that your set becomes too dull and homogeneous, with archetypes that don’t have a well-defined identity.
In my experience, however, if you overdo with “producer” mechanics, you risk that your set becomes too dull and homogeneous, with archetypes that don’t have a well-defined identity.
April 8, 2025 at 4:23 PM
For example, fabricate brings counters, artifacts, go wide, and sacrifice synergies all in one.
In my experience, however, if you overdo with “producer” mechanics, you risk that your set becomes too dull and homogeneous, with archetypes that don’t have a well-defined identity.
In my experience, however, if you overdo with “producer” mechanics, you risk that your set becomes too dull and homogeneous, with archetypes that don’t have a well-defined identity.
These mechanics require support in order to play properly in your set. For example, descend or delve ask your format to have ways to fill your graveyard.
The best part about "consumer" mechanics is that they tend to map 1:1 to archetypes, as they are very explicit at telling the player how ...
The best part about "consumer" mechanics is that they tend to map 1:1 to archetypes, as they are very explicit at telling the player how ...
April 8, 2025 at 4:23 PM
These mechanics require support in order to play properly in your set. For example, descend or delve ask your format to have ways to fill your graveyard.
The best part about "consumer" mechanics is that they tend to map 1:1 to archetypes, as they are very explicit at telling the player how ...
The best part about "consumer" mechanics is that they tend to map 1:1 to archetypes, as they are very explicit at telling the player how ...
Largely, I will classify mechanics into three types. The first one I’m going to call “consumer” mechanics. Examples are flurry, descend, delve, corrupted, ferocious, typal mechanics, and “whenever you draw your second card each turn”. Most ability words tend to belong here.
April 8, 2025 at 4:23 PM
Largely, I will classify mechanics into three types. The first one I’m going to call “consumer” mechanics. Examples are flurry, descend, delve, corrupted, ferocious, typal mechanics, and “whenever you draw your second card each turn”. Most ability words tend to belong here.
Corporate needs you to find the differences between these two plays.
March 29, 2025 at 12:50 PM
Corporate needs you to find the differences between these two plays.
These two are peak Magic design
March 21, 2025 at 10:54 PM
These two are peak Magic design
Now bring costs in which the twobrid mana is (nearly) all the pips, like this.
This is a beautiful execution of a card that you can put into your 2C+splash deck, but where the failcase for not drawing your off-color source is that the card costs 1 more, rather that it staying stuck in your hand.
This is a beautiful execution of a card that you can put into your 2C+splash deck, but where the failcase for not drawing your off-color source is that the card costs 1 more, rather that it staying stuck in your hand.
March 18, 2025 at 5:53 PM
Now bring costs in which the twobrid mana is (nearly) all the pips, like this.
This is a beautiful execution of a card that you can put into your 2C+splash deck, but where the failcase for not drawing your off-color source is that the card costs 1 more, rather that it staying stuck in your hand.
This is a beautiful execution of a card that you can put into your 2C+splash deck, but where the failcase for not drawing your off-color source is that the card costs 1 more, rather that it staying stuck in your hand.
So, anyway, can you guess which two creature type pairs show up the most times (in 4 cards in total) in their least common order?
Hint: the Ikoria Apex beasts do *not* contribute to either of them.
Hint: the Ikoria Apex beasts do *not* contribute to either of them.
March 6, 2025 at 4:27 PM
So, anyway, can you guess which two creature type pairs show up the most times (in 4 cards in total) in their least common order?
Hint: the Ikoria Apex beasts do *not* contribute to either of them.
Hint: the Ikoria Apex beasts do *not* contribute to either of them.
And as an additional trivia: which are the most popular creature type combinations?
Here's the top 50 and the full list is available here: pastebin.com/raw/fRUpmitz
I guess it's no surprise that Human takes up most of the top spots.
Here's the top 50 and the full list is available here: pastebin.com/raw/fRUpmitz
I guess it's no surprise that Human takes up most of the top spots.
March 6, 2025 at 4:27 PM
And as an additional trivia: which are the most popular creature type combinations?
Here's the top 50 and the full list is available here: pastebin.com/raw/fRUpmitz
I guess it's no surprise that Human takes up most of the top spots.
Here's the top 50 and the full list is available here: pastebin.com/raw/fRUpmitz
I guess it's no surprise that Human takes up most of the top spots.
Which types show up the most in a type pair that is sorted in a unusual way?
Spirit is the clear winner, being part of 17 type pairs that show up in both orders (like Spirit and Horror). No other type gets more than 6.
Spirit is the clear winner, being part of 17 type pairs that show up in both orders (like Spirit and Horror). No other type gets more than 6.
March 6, 2025 at 4:27 PM
Which types show up the most in a type pair that is sorted in a unusual way?
Spirit is the clear winner, being part of 17 type pairs that show up in both orders (like Spirit and Horror). No other type gets more than 6.
Spirit is the clear winner, being part of 17 type pairs that show up in both orders (like Spirit and Horror). No other type gets more than 6.
If we look at percentages rather than raw count, we see a lot of 50/50 cases i.e. type pairs that show up as much A,B as B,A.
These are almost always type combinations that show up just in two cards, once in each order. Indeed, rare type pairs are more likely to have a non-standardized order.
These are almost always type combinations that show up just in two cards, once in each order. Indeed, rare type pairs are more likely to have a non-standardized order.
March 6, 2025 at 4:27 PM
If we look at percentages rather than raw count, we see a lot of 50/50 cases i.e. type pairs that show up as much A,B as B,A.
These are almost always type combinations that show up just in two cards, once in each order. Indeed, rare type pairs are more likely to have a non-standardized order.
These are almost always type combinations that show up just in two cards, once in each order. Indeed, rare type pairs are more likely to have a non-standardized order.
Turns out, as expected, it's a very rare occurrence. Of all 1847 type combinations present in existing Magic cards, only 39 of them show up in both orders, like Spirit with Horror.
And no creature type pair appears more than four times in the unusual order.
Beware of log scale in the histogram!
And no creature type pair appears more than four times in the unusual order.
Beware of log scale in the histogram!
March 6, 2025 at 4:27 PM
Turns out, as expected, it's a very rare occurrence. Of all 1847 type combinations present in existing Magic cards, only 39 of them show up in both orders, like Spirit with Horror.
And no creature type pair appears more than four times in the unusual order.
Beware of log scale in the histogram!
And no creature type pair appears more than four times in the unusual order.
Beware of log scale in the histogram!