The battle mechanic and the land mechanic should be the same
Maybe when you deal enough damage to a land, you gain control of it
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
Why aren't lands attackable in Magic: the Gathering?
thats dumb. you're dumb.
f2pbp
not the OP but Magic is a dumb and shit game so it'd work out well.
A few reasons as to why that's stupid
1: The game's 31 years old and it'd require them to go back and assign a value to every fricking land in the game. Which would be both a pain in the ass, a balancing headache and a headache for players since suddenly their cards from the bush administration have an invisible important value on them. Yes they could just blanket "Every land before X is whatever number" but...
2: It's a new value for them to frick with and tweak, meaning they have a new way to power creep lands. Shocklands are good right? People love those! Let's make a shockland where instead of taking 3 to steal it takes 4!
3: Assuming they work directly like battles (with counters) that's an absolute fricking NIGHTMARE to keep track of. It'd get unreasonable at 4 lands. Which is the amount of lands some decks have out on turn two.
4. Dryad arbor. Just dryad arbor. Manlands too to a lesser extent
5. It's just generally a feel-bad mechanic. If you're regularly taking hits from an opponent, there's a decent chance you're already behind, meaning that people who are already behind are punished for being behind, setting them back further and further.
6. It's of limited use in multiplayer since all cards owned by a player cease to exist when that player leaves the game. And as we established in the previous reason, a player that's losing is likely going to be getting their lands stolen by people who are winning. Which would lead to situations where players suddenly go from the lead to dead last cause someone else died becoming commonplace.
And no, they can't just make it so cards owned by people stay around when that player's out of the game.
maybe we should combine it with Stratego and have the player secretly occupy one of his lands like a home base that must be destroyed.
more interesting if each player has one life but you have to destroy the right land first to find him and until his base is destroyed he has shroud and can't be attacked
magic's core rules are garbage, there's endless bullshit about layers but no interesting gameplay decisions
I'm sure with minimal modifications you could make the game good
Land cards don't represent literal ownership or presence in that location, they represent having enough connection to draw mana from it. Unless they retconned that.
In the the vidya they make it seem like two planeswalkers are squaring off at 20 paces with their spells and summoning minions like pokemon so who the hell knows anymore
This might be one of the stupidest ideas I’ll ever heard in my life, but I’m optimistic that someone on /tg/ can do worse.
What if lands. But pants.
When I first discovered this game, before reading the rules, I intuitively assumed that the land cards would somehow be involved in the combat, perhaps as, oh, I dunno, tiles on a map? I figured that there would be buildings that you'd be able to place on them, probably only one structure per land, and I figured that the creatures would be able to fight in & over these "squares" -- occupying an uncontested enemy land causes 1 damage to that player, maybe, otherwise everyone would just camp dragons everywhere lol -- but land would also be tappable to try to repell invaders (standing to the walls, closing the gates, mustering the militia, organizing the peasantry and levying the townsfolk).
Initially, for this game, like so many other works -- films & novels in particular -- I had such high hopes for it... imagine my disappointment upon reading the tiny rulebook. :/
In my headspace, there's an unnamed, undefined collectible trading card game that's just so much better than M:tG, so much more in touch with what *I* felt it was channeling, so much more M:tG than M:tG, that I *almost* cry...
>fortunately, this individual refuses to feel feelings about cardboard and what-could-have-beens
>assumes nonsense rules from vague impressions of a game
this is schizo
>believes his assumptions and expectations are more correct than reality
this is autistic
>greentext replies to schizotismposter
this is Ganker
>replying to a frogspammer
You're supposed to ignore them.
>doesn't know he's talking to the frogspammer in question rn
no u
Check out Card Wars (from Adventure Time) or Sorcery.
You know how ragavan is obnoxious because he comes down on turn one and runs away with the game if you don't answer him immediately?
Imagine if in addition to ramping, he also took away your lands.
Now imagine every single 1-drop does that.
So you win if you start the game and have a 1 drop? Because you are going to run away with the game before opponent can catch up because you would take away their resources.
Turf war is a card that exists if you like that stuff though.
then invert the mana system so you start with a lot of lands and destroy your opponent's in an attempt to mana screw him
It's been tried. It failed horribly
Magic is a shit game with a lot of obvious flaws.
Land destruction exists though.
Go shove your sword in a mountain and report back to us.
>proving the "/tg/ is bad at mtg" meme for the umpteenth time
what if lands were like shields in duel masters and players started with a lot of mana and they were destroyed over time through combat instead of playing one each turn
>t. wants a game where every disadvantage always snowballs into defeat
samegayging with your bad idea doesn't make it good
>where every disadvantage always snowballs into defeat
the game is supposed to be about micro-decisions adding up over time, not slamming a Murktide Regent and tearing your opponent a new butthole
>the game is supposed to be about micro-decisions adding up over time,
and that's why it stupid beyond believe you want to make it spiral downwards faster and faster
>Murktide Regent
Do you really get assblasted about "control threat #368"? If your opponent can slam MR at all your micro-decisions led to that. If you can't remove it that's your decisions being bad.
they represent your bond to the energy of a plane. Flavourwise we are planeswalkers. Mechanically it would let people snowball and completely frick the balance of the game. You are moronic.