Many Many Many Many Azami

DH has fast become my groups only mode of playing magic, ousting standard (since we haven’t bought a ton of new cards/have nothing worthy of bringing to FNM), and our “casual” play (centered around Vintage restrictions for cards, etc).

Each of us has our favorite color(s), as most Magic players do. My brother’s favorites center around (extending into for his Ulasht, the Hate Seed deck, and for his Kaervek the Merciless deck) for instance. One of our good friends plays a Scion of the Ur Dragon, but also plays Nicol Bolas as well as Ertai, the Corrupted, so I would argue he centers on . His brother is constantly changing his decks, so he’s probably not sure (though he has an awesome Rith, the Awakener deck at the moment). And myself?

Well, when I was just beginning getting into EDH, I happened to have a Bant deck which I played “casually”. It was standard legal, but I didn’t have many of the cards needed to make it competitive, so I transformed it into an EDH deck when our group first began playing the format. In the meantime, I was just getting into Standard after some years of not playing Magic at all. I was learning the ins and outs of rules, what made a card good, what colors were powerful… I was reading spoilers nearly every day (and even did mock ups for Worldwake during that rumor season which made it into a Channel Fireball episode of Magic TV), and pretty much just in general becoming reacquainted with the game and a more active member of the community (specifically MTGSalvation). In any case, I happened to be spending mad money on cards at the time, and thus, we all too quickly realized the power that Rafiq of the Many had as a General. After a few games, I’m thinking “AWESOME! I have one of the greatest generals in our group!! DD!”

That was until Mr. Uril, the Miststalker came in. See, I had based my deck off of the idea that many exalted creatures would just pump Rafiq to a ridiculous power/toughness, then doublestrike to kill someone in a couple turns (several times I did this in a single turn with general damage thanks to Finest Hour). The problem with this was that while my deck was built around my general (as I believe most EDH decks should be, but I’ll get to that later), it required a lot of setup to accomplish what my goal was. My friend playing the Uril deck, being a lot like me, started a movement to a more competitive list. Now, not only was my bored being wiped with Winds of Rath or Wrath of God (after Shield of the Oversoul was on Uril of course), Rafiq was getting Condemned or Arrested… Basically just getting put out of commission.  So much so unfortunately, that I scrapped the deck and went back to standard (where I wasn’t doing so well either). During this break from our newly found format, I did a ton of research on EDH generals, and stumbled upon the following…

Don't you wish your general was hot like mine?

Yes, that’s Azami, Lady of Scrolls, one of EDH’s most-hated generals. What I forgot (conveniently) to mention, was that one of my original decks was a tribute to my friend’s (the one who plays Scion, Ertai and Bolas) draw-go deck, which was built around Grim Monolith/Basalt Monolith + Power Artifact + Braingeyser/Stroke of Genius/Ambassador Laquatus. Back in the day, this deck was unbeatable within our group. To even get close to winning a 1v1 game was praiseworthy. I mimicked it (the way I see it, copying is the highest praise to an idea… that and I wanted to win games), and ever since then, I’ve been hooked on . I even built two other decks in the color shortly after, one built on Capsize + Stasis, and another simply a Wizard tribal deck (Patron Wizard of course played a large role there). The problem with my addiction to the often most-hated color of Magic was that during Shards of Alara, not only was a control deck not playable, but I did not know enough about standard to realize that 5-Color-Control, while not monocolored, was right up my alley. But I digress. My point here is that, I love the color . As you can probably tell by everything I’ve said already, I also really like to win, and I love to do redonkulous things (combos).

All of my research pointed that this was definitely the general for me. Azami is strictly , and is centered around pretty much any combo you can think of that would fit in the color (several of which are mentioned already). Pretty soon, just like the official EDH video says, I became one of the most-hated players at the table. Games started ending left and right by my (or Azami’s) hand. Soon, our group was discussing banning her from play for being too powerful.

I couldn’t believe it, after all the time put into researching the deck, trading to get the cards, playtesting, changing… My deck was about to become null/void. I mean, my deck my deck might be centered around a combo, but is playing Uril and then stacking a bunch of enchantments on hm not a combo?

That is what I’d like to take a moment to examine. In EDH, Azami is considered a “degenerate combo deck.” Other decks/generals which might (read: do) fit into this category would include Zur the Enchanter, or Sharuum the Hegemon (both of which I also play, but I bet you weren’t really surprised by that). What I find amusing is why some people seem so dead-set on hating these decks out of the format completely through banning (though I admit, I’ve had this moment with Uril). I like playing combos! Which reminds me… Wizards themselves has determined that most players fit into one of three main categories…

Timmy

Timmy is what we in R&D call the “power gamer.” Timmy likes to win big. He doesn’t want to eke out a last minute victory. Timmy wants to smash his opponents. He likes his cards to be impressive, and he enjoys playing big creatures and big spells.

Johnny

Johnny is the creative gamer to whom Magic is a form of self-expression. Johnny likes to win, but he wants to win with style. It’s very important to Johnny that he win on his own terms. As such, it’s important to Johnny that he’s using his own deck. Playing Magic is an opportunity for Johnny to show off his creativity.

Spike

Spike is the competitive player. Spike plays to win. Spike enjoys winning. To accomplish this, Spike will play whatever the best deck is. Spike will copy decks off the Internet. Spike will borrow other players’ decks. To Spike, the thrill of Magic is the adrenalin rush of competition. Spike enjoys the stimulation of outplaying the opponent and the glory of victory.

As you can see from reading above, I’m very clearly a Spike/Johnny (the former being the more important of the two). That being said, this is simply a part of who I am. I can change my likes/dislikes about Magic about as easily as I can change what my favorite foods are (spaghetti or pizza, by the way). In fact I have my friend to thank for inspiring me to move from a Johnny/Timmy player (when I first started Magic) to a Spike/Johnny (though I do play other colors, control is by far my favorite deck type). EDH is supposed to be a casual format, so I can understand players’ apprehension towards a deck like Azami, especially new players. It’s not a lot of fun to get told “No.” to everything you try and do, which is something blue was really good at (or is still good at, depending on what format you’re looking at). I also understand that winning on turn 2 isn’t very fun either. In fact, in the case of the latter, I had a Painter’s Servant + Grindstone deck once upon a time, which I sold because it wasn’t fun to win with it; it was too easy.

However, astute readers will realize one flaw in being Johnny Combo Player…

Let's face it fellow Johnnies... You'd play this if only it weren't printed in an Un-set.

All of the combo’s which I have listed up until this point have required multiple cards. You see, it’s fun for Johnny to win games using powerful cards, but, just like trying to doublestrike general damage at an opponent for the win in a single turn, it requires a lot of set up. Because of that, most combos are easily able to be disrupted; if you destroy a single piece of the combo, you could be setting Johnny back a great deal.

Now, hopefully everyone here knows the rules of EDH, because they play a big role in what I just said. Just in case though, let me go ahead and quote two in particular I’m thinking about…

5.  An EDH deck must contain exactly 100 cards, including the General.

6.  With the exception of basic lands, no two cards in the deck may have the same english name.

That’s right. Not only does Johnny have to assemble his multiple-card combo in order to win, he has to obtain it from a 100-card deck which cannot contain multiples of any combo piece. If an opponent resolves Jester’s Cap, Memoricide, Extract, Lobotomy, or any other of probably a dozen (or more) cards which can exile one of those combo pieces, Johnny may never be able to win the game, and let’s face it… Johnny likes to win on his own terms, but he’s not stupid enough to exile his library to try and save one piece. Now, put that together with a little Spike mentality, and even if one of the above cards is resolved against him, he isn’t going to tell you what combo pieces his opponent should be looking for. Spike isn’t in the business of helping his opponents; either they know what cards are being played in the format (and what decks those cards are being played in), or they don’t and will suffer lost games for it.

It’s my feeling that the competitive nature of a Spike added to a Johnny deck, which is associated with its own iconic combo, is why so many players call for the banning of cards in a casual format like EDH, or within their group of fellow players. Chances are, most of those players probably wouldn’t think twice about that Strip Mine in your deck unless you tucked a Crucible of Worlds in it as well. That Sensei’s Divining Top? Pay it no mind… until you see those two islands tapped to cast Counterbalance. As I said before, a lot of these combos require set up. The problem most players probably have with combo decks, is that they let the combo deck get out of control, or they don’t have a way to deal with the combo deck once a combo hits play.

The former is the problem I’d like to address first. I’ll go ahead and use myself as an example. After many games our group also pretty quickly realized that the power Azami has as a general. She’s basically a creature that has has haste for all intents and purposes (you can use her ability right after a Wizard enters the battlefield), and gives all your other creatures haste. With just two Wizards in play, you can easily pay the five mana and draw three extra cards in a single turn. If she doesn’t get destroyed or exiled or what have you, you can easily draw way more than that, since you’ll probably draw into even more wizards. As a result, Azami can easily get out of control turn 5 and later (sooner if you manage to grab some ramp also available to you). And so, it wasn’t uncommon for Azami to be cast many many many many times in order to try to provide the card draw needed to get my combo pieces (the most I think I ever paid for her was 15 or something), due to the fact that everyone at the table would target her (or me/my deck). The thing about this was that I wasn’t having any fun.

I'll let you live... This time...

After some time this objective of “taking out the control player” dissipated to a degree (as you can probably guess from my being here talking about this problem with you). Should it really have happened at all though? I mean, it wasn’t like I was specifically targeting any one person and making them unable to play the game. In fact, in more cases than not it’s the opposite; I’m over here with my deck and kinda doing my own thing until someone tries to target me, and then I react to that by saying “Nah, I don’t think so.” Not only that, but I often have countered a spell which would have ended the game for another player too quickly, giving them a chance to win the game. Did I have to? Absolutely not, and doing so probably left me with one less counterspell than I needed in order to prevent the destruction of my Power Artifacted Grim Monolith.

Now, some people (the same people who hated Jacerator in standard) will say “Seriously? You’re just sitting there not even interacting with the board?” Well, to you I say yes. Playing a combo deck needs to be done defensively, and that might seem like playing noninteractively. The way to make up for this is by the blue player being the “ruling” player; by using diplomacy to his advantage, as I just described. The blue player at the table can often be your greatest ally. That Akroma’s Vengeance that’s about to wipe everyone’s board (except the player casting it, who has no board, which is why he’s casting it)? The blue player probably doesn’t like it any more than anyone else due to his combo pieces getting destroyed, so he probably makes a judgement call. “Is it possible for me to recover from this? Is sacrificing my pieces worth the destruction of my opponent’s fields? Should I counter this to take the focus off of me?” These are the questions that the Johnny player asks himself when he says “Hang on… I’m thinking about whether or not to let that go…” That minute or so of thinking could turn the tide in your favor later on, despite it leaving a couple of  Johnny’s combo pieces on the field, since you have the answers for them.

Speaking of which, that leads me to my second point… If you want to play Magic well (or at least not lose), you can’t always complain about “what a lucky draw” your opponent had or “those expensive cards” he “luckily pulled.” You have to know what’s being played, and you have to know what makes Sejiri Refuge strictly better than that Coastal Tower you are playing. Relating this to Johnny, you have to know what combos are available to him. You have to know that a Sensei’s Divining Top by itself isn’t as dangerous as that tapped Grim Monolith, especially when you saw it’s controller holding the Power Artifact needed to enchant it last turn when he transmuted Muddle the Mixture. You can’t blame Johnny for your play mistakes, or for not knowing his card pool, or for having no way at all to deal with an artifact in play. Maybe it’s the Spike in me that wants to tell players “it’s your own fault Johnny combo’s out every game…” But in reading this, you know that there’s been a mistake or two you’ve made that cost you the game. As far as getting better cards for your deck? Get out there more! Every card I own in my own Azami deck I traded for. Sure, that involves spending money on cards to trade, but nothing in life is free. Playing Magic is an ongoing process; even I have cards that I’d like to get my hands on (Jace, the Mind Sculptor comes to mind) that would significantly improve my deck. But not everything is as expensive as Mr. Wallet Sculptor. Simply throwing a couple dual lands like Azorius Chancery or artifact acceleration like Armillary Sphere can greatly improve your mana curve. How about taking out that Shock and putting a Lightning Bolt in it’s place (assuming you aren’t running both already of course)? There are plenty of little tweaks to improve your deck that you can make for cheap, or even free if you have the cards and do some reading on the Gatherer or magiccards.info.

I really hope that I’ve helped put some things into perspective for you Timmys and Spikes out there. It’s as important to me as the next guy that Magic stay a fun and balanced game, which I think EDH shows off with flying colors. What’s more than that, is that I understand that many times things that seem unfair can often simply be difficult to overcome. And with that, I’ll leave you with your mice, keyboards, and monitors. Get to researching those artifact destruction and target changing spells!

http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/mr11b

Why You Suck At EDH

lright, so maybe you don’t… in general (pun intended). The thing is, problems in life are pretty much unavoidable. In life and in Magic, it’s important to minimize the effects of those problems and to deal with them effectively. In EDH, this is even more important, due to your limited number of resources. For instance, Johnny, Combo Player only has one Power Artifact in his deck. If you get rid of it, you’re getting rid of one of his infinite mana combos. But how do you get rid of it exactly? That’s what I’m going to hopefully show you today: That just because something is powerful does not necessarily mean it needs to be banned, and just because something is unfair doesn’t mean there isn’t a way to overcome it.

One thing in particular which has quite a few player’s feathers (or should I say tentacles?) ruffled is…

Yep. Emrakul, The Aeons Torn. Johnny, Combo Players and Timmy, Power Gamers everywhere are complaining that this fifteen-mana Eldrazi Titan is “format warping.” That is to say, players which are for banning the card believe that their meta has become all about “first to cast Emmy wins.” All I’ve got to say to that is, so what?

Look, putting Jester’s Cap in your deck to deal with Emrakul is no different than putting Kor Firewalker in your sideboard if you are running a white-weenie deck at an FNM with a bunch of RDW or Big Red decks. Regardless of what format you are playing, there is always a metagame. Now for some of you that term may sound unfamiliar, but don’t worry… The metagame is more or less another way of saying “the format you are playing, the decks at the location you are playing, and the cards you are running in your deck, before you shuffle up and draw seven.” In EDH, you might as well add “the tendencies your group has when playing” due to the tightly knit nature most players in EDH games have. It’s also important to note that no matter the format, the goal is to win the game. Whether that’s through general damage, or milling all your opponents, or just straight up Overrunning a hundred Saproling tokens and alpha striking your opponent, the end result is that there will be at least one loser (more for multiplayer) and at least one winner (more if you are playing teams). Why stop the banning at Emrakul? Why not any infinite combo? Why not Scion of the Ur Dragon due to Dragon Tyrant? The thing is, just like assembling Power Artifact + Grim Monolith + Ambassador Laquatus, Emrakul is only one card of a hundred that a player can pull. It also costs a lot more mana than milling everyone with a combo (though some might argue Emrakul is a combo unto itself), and in my experience, Emrakul has never won a game the second it hit the board unlike the aforementioned power artifact combo; there has always been time to get rid of it, even after it has attacked. Even better, costing fifteen mana makes Emrakul’s “combo” effect null, as it is often cheated into play via something like Tooth and Nail giving you a whole additional turn for someone to do something about it. Emrakul can be disrupted just like any of the above cards, and is no more difficult than playing against a mono blue deck like Azami which is full of counterspells.

In other words, if your meta is running Emrakul, maybe you should be running answers to Emrakul, rather than tell the player who is playing the titan that your group is banning it. Let me just go ahead and name one: Naturalize. Yes, that’s right, Naturalize. Due to the absurd amount of mana Emrakul costs, one way to get it out onto the battlefield quickly is mana ramp. There’s a number of ways to do this. If you leave one of those ways on the battlefield and expect it not to be used, that’s your choice, but that choice has a consequence, and it might just be Emrakul. Similar, is your choice not to run answers to other certain threats in your deck. If you don’t run graveyard hate, that’s fine, but not only is that good against reanimator style decks, but it works against Emrakul’s reshuffling ability if it’s destroyed. If you don’t run board wipe, that’s fine, but not only are board wipes good when you are behind or when you are up against a token deck, but it destroys Emrakul so that the player who did decide to run Relic of Progenitus can exile it. My point here is that Emrakul isn’t so much a format warping card as it is… a meta-problem-exacerbating card. Allow me to spell EDH for you… R.E.S.I.L.I.E.N.C.E. The more answers you have in your deck, the more likely it is you will win. If those answers are repeatable, then that’s even better. Hence, why Punishing Fire is better than Shock. Even though it costs one more mana, the ability for it to be repeated basically means it’s another Shock every time you return it to your hand. This fact stays the same pretty much regardless of format. If you are playing blue-white control in standard, you don’t just have to deal with another blue-white control deck. You have to deal with RDW/Big Red as well. In EDH, there are cards you can run in your deck which aren’t exclusively functional against Emrakul, and aren’t “sub-par” as compared to what you could be running in its place. No, I’m not going to look up all of them for you because in the end, the card choices for your EDH decks are up to you, and if you choose not to run an answer to a specific card or deck type, then you will lose.

However, I will give you a few of my favorite answers to Emrakul that I would run in any of my decks (provided I had a deck within the card’s colors, or owned the card)…

1. Jester’s Cap

Believe me, if I owned this card it would be in every EDH deck I own. It’s an excellent answer to pretty much any card you don’t like… including Emrakul. As I said earlier, this is also extremely devastating to combo decks, or any deck which uses a specific combination of cards to end the game extremely quickly, such as any of the infinite mana combos so famous in blue decks, or even Zur’s Empyrial Armor + Necropotence + Reliquary Tower combo. Obviously there are other cards which would fit this category like Lobotomy, but those only hit for one card at a time. As such, you should keep them in mind of course, but due to the singleton nature of EDH, they can’t even hold a candle to Jester’s Cap. To a lesser extent, this can be a catch all for pretty much any card that takes another card out of an opponent’s library such as Bribery, which actually makes having Emrakul more of a liability in your deck than an asset, and can also grab for any creature you want. Like casting Verdant Force for five mana? I know I do.

2. Evangelize

Like I said, repeatable removal is one thing that is probably most valuable in EDH. The problem with removal in general can be that the creature you want to get rid of has shroud. Well look no further my friends! While the total cost of a boughtback Evangelize is nine mana, the ability to essentially steal an opponent’s creature every turn when you have that mana every turn can be extremely valuable in the late game. With all the board wiping power white has, even token decks can end up getting their general stolen. Many of the buyback spells are worth running for no other reason than they have buyback, and can retain them for a large amount of time after the dust from a Planar Cleansing settles.

Oh, did I mention this can work on Emrakul? After playing this a couple of times on an opponent with Emrakul as their only creature you might start to thank the player for playing the card rather than hate them.

3. Rout

Yes, this is obligitory, even though it’s another white card. First, it is instant speed so you can use it to get rid of a hard-casted Emrakul. Seven mana you say? If your opponent can produce fifteen, and you can’t produce less than half of that, you probably deserve what’s coming to you. “But it’s one of the only instant speed removal spells for Emrakul!” While that may be true, Vedalken Orrery and Leyline of Anticipation both make all your spells instants for lack of another term. The point here is that board wipes are a good thing to have. Tsabo’s Decree would be like a black version of this that doesn’t require any assistance from the above cards.

4. Time Stop

By far the most “IN YOUR FACE!!!11!1″ card to stop Emrakul, is Time Stop. Yeah, that extra turn you were gonna take? Nah, that’s alright, I’ll go ahead and start mine. However, the meat is in the fact that it works on all uncounterable spells much like Mindbreak Trap, and if you’re playing 1v1, it’s basically another Time Warp in your deck. You can also use it as a political card by stopping the player’s turn who is alpha striking someone else. I scratch your back, you scratch mine? Definitely. Probably 1/4 of the time I cast this it’s for that reason.

5. Deadly Recluse

I’m only partially joking about this. The truth is, beneath Emrakul’s giant 15/15 carapace, it’s just a creature. It can be killed by deathtouch just as easily as Rout or Day of Judgement. The advantage green has is that green is really good at producing tokens and ramping mana, which makes the 6 annihilated permanents kind of irrelevant. There might only be Quietus Spike, Basilisk Collar, and Gorgon Flail to give your creatures deathtouch, but think about the creatures that have deathtouch that could be enchanted with something like Arcane Teachings or equipped with Thornbite Staff? Ever tried strapping a couple of chainsaws onto a motorcycle? No? Well, it’s something like that.

Now of course all of these are situational, but so is Emrakul. Assuming you won’t have one of these whenever your opponent gets Emrakul onto the battlefield is redundant, because your opponent isn’t always going to be able to get Emrakul onto the battlefield. It’s important to have redundant answers like the above because of the nature of Magic. You just have to be able to answer a wide variety of threats.

It’s true though, you can’t answer everything in EDH. It’s pretty much impossible, especially in multiplayer. In no way am I saying that I expect everyone who reads this to have every answer to every card on hand. However, the cards in the game aren’t the only thing which influence who wins… What you do also effects the outcome. One example would be how you might attack with your Mindless Null into the player who controls Plated Slagwurm. Mind games are a huge part of Magic, and faking out your opponent is the least of them in EDH. Politics is one thing in the format even I haven’t mastered. However, my brother has, and as a result, even though his deck is arguably as powerful as any of mine in a multiplayer environment, his win/loss ratio is likely higher. Lets bring this back to the Emrakul example… Say there is player A, B, and C. Player A cheats Emrakul into play. Player B has no answers, but has the largest board presence. Player C has an answer but doesn’t do anything about Emrakul. Player C is taking a risk in assuming player A will try to get player B down to his level. Assume that this happens. As soon as player B sees that player C had an answer to Emrakul and didn’t do anything about it, player B may remember this the next game and kill player C because of that fact alone. People in my group are like this; we all have a desire to at least get even with whoever caused us to lose a game. Sometimes this is taken so far as to use every resource available to get rid of that person. If your group is like this, it’s important to make sure to answer cards like Emrakul in this situation to prevent a loss the next game. Chances are the game I just made up would’ve continued, and left players A and C as temporary allies to knock player B down a peg or five (assuming player A didn’t react on his emotions and try to get even with player C).

In EDH, the factor of “politics” doesn’t just go to “look at what he has over there!” As it’s a game played most often among friends as I said earlier, this can often go as far as distracting them with what you heard about the latest movie that just came out, or making sure everyone remembers “that one time” someone’s board looked exactly as it does right now, and they ended up winning. In the latter, people will probably turn their attention to that player just “in case” they have a similar way to win. In the case of Emrakul, as such an iconic part of Magic now, most people will remember its power after getting hit with it once, and everyone will learn to gang up on the card until it is destroyed (or hopefully exiled). Now, some of these things might seem underhanded or sketchy, but they happen. They just do. It’s important to realize that they do, because the more you do, the more you will learn to stop caring about that movie that just came out, and more about the board state, because in the end, the goal of Magic as a card game is to win. How you do that is up to you, but if you choose not to turn certain cards because you feel it’s a “cheap” way to win, or because you feel you shouldn’t have to run X card, then that’s your prerogative. Your goal while playing the game might also to have fun, and by and large that is more important than winning; even I, as a Spike agree with this. However, if you don’t care about winning, then why should you care about losing, especially to something like Emrakul, which you chose not to run card X as an answer to?

I’m not trying to turn my readers into spikes, and ultimately whether or not your group chooses to house-ban Emrakul is not my choice. However, like ganging up on Johnny Combo Player, ganging up on a card that someone enjoys playing to the point of a ban is no better. The people that created the EDH format take great care to make sure it stays balanced, as is shown by Sheldon’s (what I assume is) quarterly updates (notice that the date there is months after ROE was released). I trust their judgement, and I think you should to. With that, work on getting a Jester’s cap or three for your EDH decks; I know I definitely will be.

Reverse Engineering Magic (Part 1)

Yes, it’s that time again.

This is going to be very similar to the previous article I posted. The difference here is that rather than finishing my own template, I’ve been working on creating my own version of the official Wizards “Post 8th” or “Modern” template. Why? Well, first of all, the first released template of the series I am working on is the “normal” template (what pretty much every card is since 8th edition). The difference with mine is that it includes two key components most other PSD files (to my knowledge) do not: the  Rise of the Eldrazi Colorless (or clear if you prefer) template, and Level Up templates (for each color). And so began my efforts to make those two components available in other forms as well, such as the “Super Art” template.

In doing this, I learned a great deal more about card construction, from the size, to the color codes for the frames and mana costs, and even to how foil cards are printed. That is the reason why I have yet to release my “Vivid Magic” template (as well as code it for MSE). I feel that will always be a work in progress, because unlike the templates I’m currently working on, I have complete control over what can happen with it. The Modern templates that exist are pretty much set in stone until Wizards decides to print something new (or several somethings, as was the case in [ROE]). That, and due to the relatively low processing power of my computer, it takes MUCH more time to work on than the currently existing templates.

Moving right along, I’m going to warn you now that this may seem somewhat repetitive due to the fact that I’d consider it an improvement on the previous post I made. Some things may seem rehashed, but I’m hoping there’s a lot more info that other people who are also interested in template development can use. Like last time, I’ll remind you: I don’t work at Wizards! I have no way of knowing if the things I’m doing are similar or completely off from what Wizards actually does, and I don’t know of many articles that talk about them (I came back to magic in [ALA])! The good thing is (yay for technology!), that I can change this info at any time where the consensus of people interested in template development say that this information is wrong, and from there, I can release an updated template of my own. So, without further ado…

Key Terms

As I said, I’m not a Wizards employee. However, there seems to be some differing opinions on what certain parts of a card are named, and things of that nature, so here’s a little info on what terms I use, what they refer to, and some comments from myself on each. The most important thing to each of these however, is the specific locations/sizes of each. For most of these, I tried to abide by Occam’s Razor when possible, meaning that I think it’s reasonable to assume that Wizards would choose “nice” numbers when creating card pieces. Don’t worry, this isn’t just a vocab lesson, but if you don’t really care about what the specifics of the card are, then you should probably skip this and wait for Part 2.

Template

This actually has two meanings, which is usually clarified by their context. First, this is the file itself which I produce (ie, CXA26483′s Modern Template). However, this is also each individual color within the file (ie, White, Artifact, ROE Colorless).

Magic cards are 63mm by 88mm, which, when set to 300ppi (the standard for hi-res images), changes to 62.99mm by 87.97mm. Because this loss of height and width is so miniscule, it’s pretty much unobservable by the human eye alone. All-in-all, this leaves us with a total of 744px by 1039px for a template.

Border

Basically this is what it says it is. It’s just the black strip going all the way around the card. Likely, it’s there for printing error purposes (in the event that the printer prints the card image anywhere on the card stock other than dead center, this prevents the card from being unreadable due to text printing off the card stock and being scrapped). However, I’ve not seen an offset card in a long time, which is no wonder considering as time goes on, technology improves, and the likelihood of a card being printed so that it is unreadable becomes less and less. Additionally, the card border has only ever been printed in black (as is the standard now), white (used to be for core sets), gold (was in the championship decks), and silver (un-serious sets). In Photoshop, I gauged the border to be 40 pixels thick @ 300ppi (pretty much the standard for a hi-res image, and also what you can assume all of my work is done in unless otherwise noted; more on that later). This also means, that the rounded rectangle they are placed on can be no more rounded than 40px; what happens is that when a stroke is placed on the interior of a rounded rectangle, it will decrease the size of the rounded edge until both flat sides of the stroke meet, which will always be equal to the roundedness of the rectangle (ie, if the rectangle is rounded at 20px, the stroke must be at least 20px for a right angle to occur).

Framepad/Frame Padding

These two terms are interchangeable, and refer to the bit of space between the border of the card, and the frame of the card (coming up next). When creating a template, it’s important to work with vector objects as often as possible. This prevents parts of the template from degrading, specifically when performing Magic Wand selections, and then deletions (which is what I did for the frame padding). In this case, because nearly all parts of the card in the template are rasterized vector objects, I simply cut out the shape of the frame from a rectangle. Most of the time, you won’t need to do this, because the card texture (which can be seen below the frame padding) usually performs the job of filling this area. When you are creating something like the [ROE] colorless template however, you want your image to show through the entire template (minus the border). Note that this layer also lies below all the others, and encompasses  ONLY the area between the frame and the border (meaning, the actual filled in area does not extend into the frame, name/typeline, image, or textbox). From the outside of the frame (on the left and right at the straight edges) to the start of the border, the frame padding is 15px. At the top, it is 13px, and the bottom, 58px.

Also in the frame padding at the bottom of the card, are the artist and trademark lines. Because Photoshop is able to set different portions of the same text layer to different fonts, it’s pretty easy to set the “il” to Magic Symbols 2008 (short for illustrator), and the artist name itself to Matrix. The line altogether is in 6pt font, and changes color according what color the card is. The “il” symbol actually has two different colors as well; When the main color for the line is white, the “i” part of the symbol is black, and when the main color for the line is black, the “i” part of the symbol is white. Both lines are set 15px off to the right from the end of the left border, 10px apart, and 4px off the bottom border end (this is where the bottom of the copyright line starts).

Colorless: White
White: Black
Blue: Black
Black: White
Red: Black
Green: Black
Hybrid: Go according to whichever color is on the left.
Gold: Black
Artifact: Black
Land: White

Below that is the copyright line, which is done in MPlantin at 4px. Also, the ™ and © symbols. You can create these by typing “alt+0153″ and “alt+0169″ respectively.

Frame

Keeping in our top-down overview, next up is the frame of the card. This is what holds the main text areas together (nameline, typeline, and textbox). This actually extends a bit over the frame padding with its outer bevel, which is set to smooth, 150% depth, and 6px, with lighting at a 55-degree angle, and 30-degree altitude (the rest of the settings are default). Additionally, for most templates, this is fully overlapped by the name and typelines. For something like the [ROE] colorless template, you will need to cut out a section from the frame below both of those parts of the card. The reason for doing this to the frame padding as well as the frame, is so you are able to control the transparency specifically for both areas; if the frame padding extended below the frame itself, you would not be able to control how transparent that the area of the frame was without the frame padding affecting it (the same being true for the  name and typelines). As is above, the frame is centered 15px from the border on the sides, and 13px from the border at the top. The border itself I gauged to be about 8px wide when traveling vertically, and 7px wide when traveling horizontally. It’s also colored according to the following hex codes:

Colorless: c8c0bd
White: ffffff
Blue: 385b8f
Black: 272624
Red: b13d25
Green: 315134
Gold: d2bb55
Artifact: dedad8
Land: 9d8e6e

Name/Typeline

In the modern templates, the name and typelines are identical, which is why they are lumped into the same category (though obviously their contents differ). Both the nameline and typeline have an inner bevel which is chiseled hard at 150% depth, and 4px wide, lighting being the same as the frame (you can set the global light to those numbers). Additionally, there is a black (hex: 000000) outer stroke set to 2px overlapping the frame (though the whole layer is usually overlapping the frame, the typically visible part is overlapped by 2px. Both the name and typelines are also overlapped by a different texture than what appears in the frame padding (not the case for the [ROE] colorless template however).

The nameline and typeline also both have different size text, the former being 11pt, and the latter being 9. Additionally, the name text is not vertically or horizontally centered, but is off-set to the bottom somewhat (the exact distance from the end of the bevel at the bottom and the left being 7px). The font for the card name is the same as the type: Matrix. The mana cost uses 9pt “Magic Symbols 2008″ font (sans hybrid costs using “Magic Symbols 2008 Hybrid”), but due to most colorless costs being one digit, two digit colorless costs need to have their kerning lowered to -500. Additionally the mana cost backings all have a drop shadow set to 4px and spread 100% (the lighting being the same as the global), and all have their own color according to the hex codes below.

Colorless: c8c0bd
White: fbf9d9
Blue: c1d9ed
Black: bab1ab
Red: f9a47e
Green: a6c597

The typeline text is set to the same distance right of the end of the bevel as the name text, but is set 12px off the bottom (for characters not extending below the text baseline, same as the name text). Additionally, the typeline uses the “em dash” character (which is “—”). Now, it’s important to note that not all fonts have access to ASCII characters like this, the copyright symbol, or the trademark symbol. Matrix happens to support the em dash character (which is pretty much the extent of what ASCII characters it supports), but if you use a font which doesn’t, the commonly used “web safe” fonts should support it (I at least know that Courier New does). You can create the em dash character by holding down the “alt” key, and typing 0151. After you release the alt key, you’ve got your em dash!

The typeline also holds the set symbol to the far right. Most of these vary, but new symbols typically move as far right vertically centered as possible without overlapping the typeline bevel. They also are colored according to the hex codes below (ignoring “Copper Common”, which was created by White Dragon, and “Old Rare” which is found on The Gatherer, and the fact that all current commons have a white stroke [ffffff], where the above rarities all have a black stroke [000000], with the exception being earlier sets and promos):

Common: Interior: 000000
Copper Common: Dark: 834c34  Light: e4a38b
Uncommon: Dark: 626e77  Light: b7d1e1
Rare: Dark: 8d742f  Light: d7bd74
Old Rare: Dark: 300000  Light: a15c00
Mythic Rare: Dark: bb2c26  Light: f7971d
Special: Dark: 622d76  Light: bf99c3

Image

It’s pretty obvious that Magic is an art centered game, so it’s no wonder that the card images are given the most space. Each image is usually larger than the 618px by 455px space, but the focus of the art always exists in this space (for instance, the image at the left could be moved up, but Kozilek’s “head” would be right underneath the nameline, which would pull the focus too far to the top of the card). Obviously for full art cards, more art can be shown, but the same point is still true: The main character(s) of creature art and the focus of all noncreature spells exist in this space. The real shown area is actually 3px less on all sides than the above dimensions (which is odd, because according to the layer style, the stroke within the image area is only 2px). Promo cards also have an embossed date in the lower right corner of this space, indicating whether the card was a prerelease or release promo. Also, foil cards have their ink printed in such a way that only certain parts of the foil sheet show through the ink. For instance, a dragon might not have its scales show a significant amount of foiling, but the fiery breath it’s shooting might be completely foiled, as well as its mouth or eyes. I’ll be talking more about this in another article.

Textbox

And we’re almost done!

The textbox is where all the rules text and flavor text for a card goes. Because card’s rules text length varies, I can’t give you a specific size for which the MPlantin and MPlantin-Italic fonts which are used here will be. You’ll have to look at other cards which have a similar word count to your own card (if you are making a new card), or you can go to magiccards.info, and gauge the font size from the cards there (if you’re replicating a card). What I can tell you about the font size, is that regardless of how many lines it is, each line should have the same font size and leading (which should be set to the same number as the font size), as shown on the left. Also, the spaces in between each should be about half of what the font size is, but that’s just a guess. Because Photoshop doesn’t have a typesetting feature, you’ll have to spend a pretty decent amount of time here if you want the text to turn out right (don’t even get me started on the GIMP >.< ).

Flavor text in this section also changed when the new templates shifted to “modern” in 8th edition. Before 8th, whenever a character or saying was quoted in flavor text, the character/saying origin would be right aligned. In modern templates, this is now left aligned with the rest of the flavor text. You’ll also need the “—” character in the event you do quote a character or saying, as shown in this example.

P/T Box

For such a small part of the card, this deserves a pretty good deal of attention.

First, the Power and Toughness box sits above all the other non-text layers, and unlike those layers, it’s not in any way integrated into the rest of the card (where the other things like the framepad, frame, and name/typeline all flow into one another, the p/t box is just kind of… there).

Second, there are no pre-set bevels which you can use to create the one seen to the left (or on any other modern templated card). To create this bevel, you can go to the “Bevel and Emboss” section of the layer style dialog, and set the style to “Inner Bevel”, “Chisel Hard”, 250% depth, and 8px in size. Global light should already be set, and the rest of the options are default. After that, go to the “Contour” sub-menu, and click the image of the contour (NOT the dropdown). This will bring up the contour editor. You actually only need 3 points for this: One set to Input: 0%/Output: 0%, the next set to Input: 50%/Output: 10%, and the last set to Input: 100%/Output: 0%. After that you’ll need to overlay the p/t box with whatever texture exists for the name and typelines. Also, the p/t box is never transparent.

I understand that was a lot of info to grasp, but most of it is important nonetheless. I know that not everyone has access to photoshop as well, so I can’t say that all of these settings are going to be the same in something like the GIMP (though that doesn’t have much of the functionality that makes my method of template development possible).

Hopefully this has some info which is pretty valuable to people looking to get into template developing, and at least the groundwork is laid for Part 2. Be sure to leave comments letting me know what you think! I’m hoping to start doing this more often, and not all my posts will be about Photoshop (I can guarantee that. ).

Of Games and Lines

Yay for my first entry! That aside however, hopefully this is enjoyable.

Anywho, In January, probably around the 15th or so, I found a contest over at MTGSalvation (if not the biggest Magic: the Gathering community, one of them for sure). In case you didn’t take a look at what it was, the challenge was to “create a new template for a single game element.” I’ve linked to the official website for people who don’t know thing #1 about the game because I’ll be talking about it as if you had played the game for a year or so. Essentially, this basically means we were to create a new frame style for at least one type of card. Most of the entries you see on the contest page went more broad with the challenge, having gone as far as to show different colors of the card template (template being, the frame/style) they created, making this more like a challenge to create the next card style for M11, or the next core set, similar to how the card style changed from…

...this...

...to this.

A lot of people were angry about this change (like other things recently introduced to the game). It happens. However, you can see that the change is extremely subtle. While the challenge in the contest was to create a new frame, I went with more of an update approach, like Wizards (the company which owns MtG) did for the 8th edition change. For comparison…

...I changed this...

...into this.

Now, this is still somewhat an early development shot of my style, Vivid Magic (named for a card design program called MSE, which Wizards themselves has apparently used as well). If you looked at the contest poll, at the time of this entry, I’m about to lose to Levelten’s entry. You can see my comments here. In depth analysis aside, I feel of all the entries, Levelten’s design was the best the contest had to offer. However, it’s probably one of the least likely to see print. Which leads me to my first section of this article…

Wizards’ Design Ethic

I kinda should name this “What I Think Wizards’ Design Ethic Is” but, I’m sure that you can assume that since I don’t work there, I don’t actually know what it is. But having worked on this contest, I think I have a pretty good idea what it is. If you think about it for awhile, there are several key parts in a Magic card. Just in case you don’t want to, I’ve emphasized them…

...here.

Now, little discrepancies aside (arguing you could split the power/toughness into two parts, splitting the flavor text into its own section, and counting the border/ frame themselves), these are the main parts of a  magic card. From left to right and top down, there’s the card name, mana cost, image, supertype, subtype, set, rules text/flavor text, artist, and power/toughness. As you can see, that’s generally how I cut up the card. There’s a few subtle differences between the Vivid style and the Modern style you see above. The point is, all the same important parts are still emphasized. Like I said, though my template is more of an update than a new one, my principle questions to myself when designing it were…

1. Are players still going to be able to pick out the important parts of the card?
2. Are players going to have to get used to the placement of those parts?
3. Does my design actually improve on anything (that I see as a problem with the Modern template)?
4. Is this actually able to see print?
5. Is this still going to be a Magic card when I’m finished?

Is this still going to be a Magic card when I’m finished?

Of all the questions, #5 was the most important to me. A lot of people have argued (or complained, take your pick) that Magic has been headed for a place that isn’t Magic (as in, looks like a different game, such as Yu-Gi-Oh, Pokemon, etc). So, making sure that there was no question that this was still Magic: the Gathering, and not Pokemon: the Gathering, was important.

Is this actually able to see print?

Continuing bottom up, #4 was more of a realistic thing. Many people pay good money for alt-art cards, some of which include extending the art beyond the borders. However, despite overriding their purpose after print, during print, they do have some use. Back in the day (before I got involved in magic), Magic cards had much more rounded borders due to the game being new, and their printing process not being perfected yet (as far as I’m aware). That is why borders exist; machines can and will fail. The borders of cards are a buffer to allow misprinted cards to exist (where the actual card image is shifted up/down/left/right/etc on the physical card itself), and still be up to par with the current printing standards. Imagine if there was no border. Even a small shift could leave out extremely important card parts unusable, and that would surely mean a disastrous amount of cards would be thrown away.

Does my design actually improve on anything (that I see as a problem with the Modern template)?

My #3 question, I think should be fairly obvious, but just in case, here’s some things I think are clearly improved on. Do note that some of these changes were made with MSE in mind, which doesn’t have a typesetting aspect to it, which makes some of these improvements shine much better with that program than you would probably see actually printed.

• The extra space between the edges of the important card fields and the borders has been reduced to ~8 pixels, leaving more room for those fields.
• The borders have been reduced by ~4 pixels. As time goes on, technology which allows cards to be printed more accurately is developed, so it’s not so unrealistic to see the borders shrink this little bit.
• Mana costs for the cards now have their own line. Cards with really long names have to be squeezed into the box, especially if the card costs a lot. Even though a typesetting program is actually used to place the text on Magic cards, that can only do so much.
• Card supertypes are now symbolized, leaving more room for subtypes. I got some feedback on the design saying that “there’s already enough symbols to memorize”. Well, this is one of those things I decided you’ll just have to get used to until I release a version which allows for normal text.

Those are pretty much the main changes.

Are players going to have to get used to the placement of those parts?

On to #2: As I said in #5, I wanted to make sure that the template was still an example of a Magic card when I was done. As such, the mana cost is till after the name at the top of the card, and the supertypes are still before the subtype (though I’m not sure you’d be able to change the order on that anyways).

Are players still going to be able to pick out the important parts of the card?

And last, #1. Now, Wizards emphasis on the differing card parts is pretty apparent; The name/mana cost and supertype/subtype/set are all on a “raised” platform, the rules text is in a “sunken” box, and power/toughness is on a floating disc thing on the bottom right. I kept the “raised” platform look for the name and type/subtype areas, and used a lighter color to make the mana and rules text appear to be on the same level (in this case, the middle). Last, the supertypes, set, and power/toughness are all set back into a kind of “socket”, for the lowest (or furthest back, whichever) level. I thought that splitting these from most important to least important was the best way to do it, and so, it still looks like the fields are almost in the same place as the ones on the Modern template.

So, as you  can see, I wanted to make sure that the changes made were, in short, effective and subtle. But how did I do it? Well, onto…

Implementing the Design

Yes, at some point you actually have to do something. Theory is nice, but it doesn’t really do anything. Like many works of art, my design starts with a line. Now, double that line’s size, and round off the edges.

Seriously though, a few people have asked me what brushes I’ve used for the frame. The truth is, I’ve not actually hand-made a single thing. All of the work is done by Photoshop; each part is made using layer styles.

THE LINES; THEY DO NOTHING. Seriously though, I actually use all of them. That transparent thing around the edges is the border, by the way.

As you see above, each section is literally held together by a single continuous black line, and the border is just a rounded rectangle. I cut these up just using the magic wand, and put them on different layers, and there you have it; separate layers for each card field. Now, apply styling to those, and now you have something like…

...this.

Now, I’m sure that sounds a lot simpler than it looks, but that’s really all I did. Playing with the layer styles for a long time gave me the result I wanted for a normal version of a black card, then applied the same styling to the appropriate fields for a land to get what you see above. The part that takes so long is pasting the style to every other layer for that color, and then having to cut up the different parts so that the final .psd file is actually customizable. That’s what all those guides you saw are for (the blue lines on the image before the one above).

Even harder than that however is having done most of the work on a flash drive, then trying to free up space on the flash drive, and accidentally delete everything you’ve done for a good week or so. For reference, “finishing” a card color, which includes rasterizing the ~10 or so layers that make up the card, which looks like this…

...this...

…takes probably 1 day of work if I work nonstop. I have a life too ya know! But yeah, that’s a ton of layers. Especially when you have to remake them (which I did).

Mistakes aside, here’s a couple preview images (in all their hi-res glory) for you guys. I know this ended somewhat abruptly, but there honestly isn’t a whole lot to explain about what I did other than what you see above. I’m hoping to have everything (meaning, a V0.1 .psd file) finished by the end of the month, but I’m not making any promises. Enjoy. =]

Here's a 4-walker image. In the final version, the text area will be transparent. I was worried that some of the field areas would be too white, but it looks pretty good. Also, plan on seeing new loyalty ability symbols (by new I mean, re-made @ higher quality).

Yes, flip cards included. Here's a Flip Planeswalker. In the .psd file, you should be able to transform this into a Creature->PW or Land->PW, etc. This may look a little strange depending on your monitor.