It's that time again. Today, we are going to wrap up all the Core Set 2019 development goodness. If you missed the first installment, be sure to check it out here.
If you're new to the series, the M-Files is where we share some of the more interesting design comments from our internal file database, Drake. The process of making Magic cards involves many people and tools, and Drake is one place where we record changes, comments, and feedback.
For Core Set 2019, lead set designer Ethan Fleischer shared many of his #M19CardStories on Twitter. That means you'll be getting bonus content from Ethan himself along with all the usual development and design comments you've grown to love.
Click below to see who will be commenting today.
EEF: New card. Sorcery Fling for R.
YS: Added from Limited changes/mini teams/hole-filling.
MDT: Flang, wow, card name+.
ABRO: I love flanging things.
EEF: Flang and Fling are just too close, sorry. RIP Flang
DSJ: Thud lit
Card names. One of the most important parts of a Magic card, names usually change many times during development. Thud was inspired by Fling, but one mana cheaper and at sorcery speed. Surprisingly, this card's design remained the same throughout the entire process—a rare feat indeed. Unfortunately, we didn't want players getting the names confused, so Flang became Thud.
Fling is a sweet card. It's so versatile! You can sacrifice a creature that an opponent has aimed removal at. You can get in those last few points of damage in a race... #MTGM19 #WOTCstaff #M19CardStories 1/4 pic.twitter.com/P9ZMaQZKyJ— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 8, 2018
Apex of Power
EEF: New card. Story Spotlight #1: Nicol Bolas had godlike power.
EEF: Possible names: Planeswalker's Will, Dracopotence.
ABRO: Holy moly, can I chain these together?
YS: Good callout, ABRO. That almost certainly means we shouldn't make this card. Hmm
EEF: Is there a number of cards less than seven where it's still an awesome card but isn't too strong?
EEF: 7RRR seven cards -> 6RR five cards.
EEF: 6RR five cards -> 7RR only works if you cast it from your hand. Doesn't chain now.
EEF: Cast cards with paying mana costs -> add WWUUBBRRGG.
DEL: Missing words?
EEF: Added words. Subtracted "if you cast from hand" text.
EEF: Add WWUUBBRRGG -> add RRRRRRRRRR spend mana as if it were any color. Tracking all that mana was difficult.
ABRO: Can we have a "cast from hand" back? I don't want to chain it.
EEF: Now you can only cast it from your hand.
MDT: Hard to figure out how much R I'm getting. Can we write out the number of R? Players had this complaint about all the EEEEEE in Kaladesh too.
EEF: Now makes ten of any colors.
EEF: Changed from a casting restriction to a bonus (mana) if you cast from hand.
EEF: 7RR -> 7RRR because bonus
ID: When do I choose what colors of mana I get? I can see this being a hassle in digital.
ROSEJ: Big hassle for Magic Online. Not great to have mediocre user experience on mythic rares.
EEF: I'm happy to tweak this to make digital implementations work better. I'd love to hear suggestions.
ELI: You could get ten mana of any one color and then it can let you spend mana for the rest of the turn as though it were mana of any type. I suggest "any one color" to avoid putting ten mana symbols in a row in the text.
As part of the card cycle that tells the story of Bolas's downfall and return to power, Apex of Power had to feel unique, exciting, and powerful. When making huge effects like this, we need to be extra careful that the card isn't overshadowing everything else in Standard. It took some iteration to mold the original card into this final package. At the beginning, you could chain these into each other and run through a large portion of your deck as soon as this was cast. Sure, it cost ten mana, but it was still having unintended consequences. Melissa excellently pointed out a common complaint from Kaladesh block where players had to count out all the energy icons on their card to figure out how many were there. This led to the final version of the card, awesomely giving it Black Lotus text!
EEF: Functional reprint of Tormenting Voice
JWW: I turned it into an actual reprint, per our conversation.
EEF: If this is too strong (for Constructed) we can use Rummaging Goblin or something like that. Or move it to uncommon?
VEENA: This isn't an official or final answer, but the last time we brought it up in a Play Design meeting, we felt that while it is the strongest filtering red gets, red should probably have it most of the time.
Red card draw is normally done much differently than blue card draw to keep the color pie nice and clean. We want red card draw to exist, but it needs to be more difficult in some way. A way we have traditionally approached this is that red needs to discard some number of cards to draw new ones. We nickname this "rummaging." At the beginning of development, the story for Core Set 2019 wasn't solidified, and thus Ethan began with a functional reprint of Tormenting Voice here. As the story solidified, the flavor from Khans of Tarkir in which Sarkhan is being tortured by visions from Ugin resonated perfectly with the focus on Bolas and the overall dragon theme.
The folks making Magic 2010, the first of the core sets with new cards, reconcepted some older cards to make them more resonant. Counsel of the Soratami became Divination, for example. #MTGM19 #M19CardStories #WOTCstaff 1/4 pic.twitter.com/HfKtOGnG3V— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 8, 2018
Early on in M19 design, I had my eye on Tormenting Voice as a card to potentially reconcept a la Counsel of the Soratami. It was a card we reprint a lot, but the concept is a little weird. 2/4 pic.twitter.com/RMcMKEuVFM— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 8, 2018
As the story content of M19 solidified, however, the original Khans of Tarkir version of Tormenting Voice was just too perfect. In the backstory, Sarkhan is literally tormented by Ugin's voice while he's in the Eye of Ugin. Plus Volkan Baga's art on this card is ????. 3/4 pic.twitter.com/ZiLmWVuFza— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 8, 2018
So, you're safe this year, Tormenting Voice. But keep your nose clean. I've got my eye on you! 4/4— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 8, 2018
DEL: Iconic at common? I hear Mark Rosewater's voice in my head questioning this.
EEF: 3RR 3/4 must attack -> 2RR 2/2 attack trigger +1/+0 and first strike.
YS: We talked about this becoming 2RR 2/2 flying first strike.
EEF: Removed "attack trigger +1/+0 and first strike." Now has static first strike. Previous card was pretty adorable, so I'm interested in whether people like this newer, simpler version.
ELI: It's cute! Red fliers at common are unusual enough that "there's a Dragon subtheme, that's why" may be the only time we get to do this card.
EEF: 2RR 2/2 flying first strike -> 5RR 5/6 2R: flying until end of turn. This is pretty weird for a red common.
EEF: -> 3RR 3/3 flying. ETB pay 2R to deal 3 to anything.
MDT: This does not look like a common to me.
ABRO: Like this more as an uncommon
JDR: Thirding Melissa's and ABro's feelings.
AF: Common Dragons either don't look common or don't look like Dragons. Opting for the lesser crime here. Needed for the red-green ramp archetype.
EEF: This card is doing a lot of work. We have a Dragon tribal theme in this set; we need a common Dragon.
Not only do Dragons look odd at common, they spark an above average amount of development comments! Dragons are supposed to be giant, flashy, and strong. How could we make one into a simple common? With Dragon tribal as one of the themes of the set, we needed something appealing for the archetype at common. It took a lot of iteration, and even at the end, people weren't completely sold on this. Turns out, common Dragons are rare
This meant that we would have to get our Dragon as-fan high enough. (As-fan is the average number of cards of a given quality in a booster pack.) An uncommon Dragon increases the Dragon as-fan by 0.0375. while a common increases it by 0.099. 2/9— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 7, 2018
We had a couple of great reprints at uncommon, Volcanic Dragon, which is a simple, elegant card, and Dragon Egg, which is a great top-down design and counts as two Dragons for the purposes of some interactions. 3/9 pic.twitter.com/KfOXpDcPpR— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 7, 2018
That wasn't enough to get our as-fan high enough, and I didn't want to make every uncommon red creature a Dragon. It's important to have a variety of concepts, both to demonstrate the breadth of Magic's worldbuilding and to make it easy to distinguish cards from one another. 4/9— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 7, 2018
Lightning Shrieker, from Fate Reforged, is a pretty cool design, but it's relatively weak and involves too much shuffling. (See my earlier thread on Elvish Rejuvenator for why shuffling causes problems.) 6/9 pic.twitter.com/adkSevdI4q— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 7, 2018
Dragon Hatchling from M13 was causing me cognitive dissonance. Why was the Dragon token that hatches out of the Dragon Egg a 2/2, while this card was a 0/1? I guess you could argue that they're different species or something, but it just felt too weird to me. 7/9 pic.twitter.com/kpBYpV3r0N— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 7, 2018
We decided to design a new card. After a lot of iteration, we landed on this 3/3 flier with a pseudo-kicker that felt like a breath weapon. This is a good reward for ramping in Limited, and comes with flood insurance. 8/9— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 7, 2018
We wouldn't normally put a 3/3 flying creature at common in red, but this is an example of bending the color pie to accommodate a set's themes. 9/9 pic.twitter.com/4J8fkMEiFj— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 7, 2018
YS: Added from Limited changes/mini teams/hole-filling.
AF: Better than Sindbad? Probably?
ID: Looks strong for a common.
MJJ: From the name, I expected this to be a common.
EEF: Changed name from Common Farmer to Uncommon Farmer.
EEF: 1/2 -> 1/3
YS: Wow, from Sindbad to Sindokay, and now to Sindgood?
AP: Looks Sindgreat to me.
Talk about power creep! Poor Arabian Nights. Dryad Greenseeker isn't a strict upgrade from old Sindbad, as filling up the graveyard could be useful in some cases. Color-shifting this to green is quite appropriate. Keying off lands certainly feels more green than blue and boosting the stats a bit puts our little Dryad right at home.
EEF: Reprint from Rise of the Eldrazi. Is this an A+ or a Moti?
EEF: CQIed. I think we need to design a new card for this slot.
EEF: Moving this to rare; the world needs to know the feeling of resolving a Pelakka Wurm.
If you played Standard back in the Rise of the Eldrazi days, you may remember this gigantic Wurm as an uncommon. To explain why we moved it up to a rare, we first need to define some of the shorthand language used in the comments above.
- A+ is the second highest rating on a scale that we use to grade cards for their strength in Booster Draft.
- Moti (short for the original Limited bomb, Mahamoti Djinn) is the highest rating on that scale, usually reserved for only rares and mythic rares.
- CQI stands for "continuous quality improvement," which is admittedly a mouthful. This means that we need to improve the quality of the card in this slot.
Now that we have some vocabulary sorted out, Play Design didn't want a menace such as Pelakka Wurm terrorizing a core set Draft experience, but Ethan wanted the world to enjoy casting huge, value-laden monsters in Standard! The compromise was to raise its rarity so that its appearance in Limited was
"And it's been printed four times now!" Three stacks of Conspiracy Pelakka Wurms slump into each other, dominoes-style, sending your cat screeching from the coffee table. 3/10 pic.twitter.com/DPBK3aJfBu— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 7, 2018
But really, which is more important? The way we die, or the way we LIVED? 5/10— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 7, 2018
And you haven't REALLY lived until you've resolved a Pelakka Wurm. There's no feeling like gaining 7 life, getting a 7/7 with trample, and knowing that, even if your opponent has removal, you WILL gain card advantage! 6/10— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 7, 2018
I believe it was @Murk_Lurker who first suggested that it was time for Wurm Daddy to make his reappearance in Standard. I jumped on it, because Pelakka Wurm, for the reasons previously stated, is one of the greatest Magic cards of all time. The "GOAT," if you will. 7/10— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 7, 2018
So I shopped Pelakka Wurm around to various play design team members. "Is Pelakka Wurm an A+?" (A+ is the highest power level we allow at uncommon.) "BWAH HAH HAH HAH HAH HAH HAH HAH no." they replied, each and every one. "Moti." (Moti is the highest Limited power level.) 8/10— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 7, 2018
So I could either mess up M19's Limited gameplay and power level balance, move the card up to rare, or CUT THE CARD FROM THE SET AND DENY AN ENTIRE GENERATION THE JOY OF RESOLVING PELAKKA WURM IN STANDARD. 9/10— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 7, 2018
Put that way, my course was clear. As is my conscience. I regret nothing. 10/10— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 7, 2018
EEF: This could just be a huuuge vanilla.
ROSEJ: Ixalan has a 9/9 for 6GG at common.
EEF: 4GG -> GGGGG
ROSEJ: Liking this more. You get a lot of Dino for that broccoli.
KEN: Curves right before Primalcrux!
YS: Good game, great game, greatest!
YS: If we end up thinking this is miserable, then I'd say this card would be higher net fun at 10/7 and still pretty exciting.
EEF: But 10/10 is just so beautiful.
ID: Looks strong with Rhonas providing trample
EEF: New card.
YS: Added from Limited changes/mini teams/hole-filling
MDT: I love this!
JDR: I don't think this being optional is a good trade-off. Occasionally I won't want to draw, but I always won't want to click an extra time.
EEF: Removed "you may" for fewer clicks! Great point, Jules.
AP: 2GW -> 1GW, 2/4 -> 2/2, you want to actually cast this before some amount of enchantments.
DEL: Enchantresses have been Druids in the past, check creature type.
EEF: Now a Druid
We try and template cards to be intuitive and easy to use in a functional manner. If you are playing this card, you will almost always want to draw a card when you cast an enchantment, though it isn't 100%. We could choose to give you the option to draw a card, but that situation will be so rare that it simply isn't worth the words, rules cases, and extra work need to be done in a digital game. Also, Druids. Enchantresses are always Druids.
Chromium, the Mutable
EEF: New card from hole-filling.
YS: Added from Limited changes/mini teams/hole-filling
DEL: Filled in type line
EEF: Making these all six-mana 6/6 fliers for Limited playtesting purposes.
SPS: Feels weird to do a cycle of shard mythic rare Dragons in a core set.
AF: I think it's the right amount of texture.
ELI: Agree with AF, core sets can really use something cool and memorable as a hook.
EEF: Play Design requests a classic control finisher here.
ABRO: Yes, I request a classic control finisher.
EEF: New design. This Dragon can turn into a Human with hexproof if it needs to hide.
DEL: Query "white Human"? Might want to stay away from that one and simply let the creature keep its current colors.
EEF: Removed "white" and added "indestructible."
EEF: Indestructible -> unblockable
EEF: Activation cost 2 -> 1
Del: 3WUB -> 4WUB; 6/6 -> 7/7
Del: Picks up "can't be countered." Activation cost 1 -> discard a card.
GJ: This card is cool.
Core sets in general are of a lower complexity than our main booster releases. Regardless, Elder Dragons coming back sounded so sweet that we decided it would be a net positive to reintroduce them here as a cycle of mythic rares. As our fearless leader Aaron Forsythe noted, it just felt right. At some point in development, Chromium picked up a unique protection ability that happens to be a huge flavor win. His storied journey through the Multiverse had him pose as a human for some portion of his long life.
Nicol Bolas, the Ravager
EEF: Legends version was a super-specter.
DEL: It's going to be a challenge to find a printable name for this card. The title bar needs to contain "Nicol Bolas" and four mana symbols, and that doesn't leave a great deal of space for flourishes. Consider that name choice sooner rather than later?
AP: This card is no joke! Sometimes I'll be sad that I can't keep hitting my opponent with my 4/4 flier while they have no cards in hand! Love the design, could see different numbers.
PI: Super cool card! My guess is a bit too strong currently.
EEF: Does this kill the opponent before you have a chance to transform?
AF: What if he cost a little more and made you discard two cards?
EEF: Specter -> upkeep target opponent sacs a creature or discards
EEF: Target player -> opponent
YS: Added from Limited changes/mini teams/hole-filling
EEF: 1UBR 4/4 -> 2UBR 5/5. At the beginning of your upkeep, target opponent sacrifices a creature or discards a card. Then if that player has no cards in hand, exile CARDNAME, then return him to the battlefield transformed under his owner's control. -> When CARDNAME enters the battlefield, each opponent discards two cards. 4UBR: Gain control of up to one target creature. Exile CARDNAME, then return him to the battlefield transformed under his owner's control.
ELI: I have quibbles with this design, but I'll focus on the rules quirk. You want "target creature an opponent controls" so he can't target himself, right?
EEF: No. I would prefer him to be able to transform regardless of the board state.
ABRO: FFL meeting -> move to 5/4 and 5UBR to activate.
EEF: 5/5 4UBR activation -> 5/4 5UBR activation
EEF: Hero's Downfall -> Mill 7
EEF: Activated ability target opponent -> each opponent
EEF: 5UBR to activate -> 4UBR.
EEF: Activation 3UBR -> 4UBR sorcery speed. Could be 3UBR, T if we prefer that
EEF: Cut Edict from transform ability.
EFF: Hard to position big Grixis creature that ETBs early and still inspire player to transform it.
AF: Much development so far. Isn't it just exciting to flip this thing after a few turns?
Whoa. Nicky B himself, back at it again. This time with a sleek, efficient card as opposed to the usual high-costed finisher. Nicol Bolas, the Ravager went through a lot of iteration to get to the final design you see today. Ethan knew he wanted to keep the design away from Nicol Bolas, God-Pharaoh since they would be sharing space in Standard for some amount of time. We tried many options for how we could make it appealing for you to want to transform into a giant planeswalker. Milling, creature destruction, and Mind Control variants were all tested. It turned out the simplest answer was "Hey, you know there is an extremely powerful, difficult-to-kill planeswalker on the other side of this thing, right?"
Nicol Bolas, the Arisen
EEF: All-new abilities.
DEL: Templated. Check me?
EEF: Looks good.
EEF: +1: Destroy target planeswalker -> -2: Destroy target permanent.
EEF: Tweaked the numbers a bit.
EEF: Up to one target planeswalker.
EEF: 5 loyalty -> 7. +1 draw two -> +2 draw two. +2 destroy planeswalker -> -3 destroy creature or planeswalker. -2 reanimate -> -4 reanimate. -10 ultimate -> -12.
DEL: Review; not feeling red on either side?
EEF: Good catch Del, "Destroy" -> Deal 10 damage.
NB: Buff candidate.
AP: Nice try, Nicolas
Once the creature side of Nicol Bolas, the Arisen was hammered out, the planeswalker half fell right into place after only a small amount of iteration.
Okay, here's the big one. Once we decided that we were going to do a "Nicol Bolas Origins"-themed core set, the first card I knew we needed was a double-faced Nicol Bolas card. #MTGM19 #M19CardStories #WOTCstaff 1/6 pic.twitter.com/bjjAbppuR9— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 5, 2018
One of the challenges we faced in designing our Nicol Bolas was the presence in Standard of Nicol Bolas, God-Pharaoh, a 7-mana planeswalker. Our Bolas needed to be a sleeker, 4-5 mana, so as not to attempt to directly compete with the older card. 2/6 pic.twitter.com/NY7XLUZFqy— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 5, 2018
We tried to position early versions of the card for a Grixis control deck, but quickly found that a control deck has no interest in a mid-sized creature that later turns into a planeswalker. 3/6— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 5, 2018
We found a better home for our card in midrange decks. We put the majority of Bolas's power into the front face, and designed the card such that it would rarely be possible to transform the card, but that it would be absurdly powerful once you had done so. 4/6— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 5, 2018
It was important that the back face be sufficiently attractive that it was almost always worth flipping away from your 4/4 flying creature. 5/6— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 5, 2018
Visually-speaking, we experimented with the front face illustration resembling Bolas's visual design from D. Alexander Gregory's illustration of Bolas's legendary creature card, but decided that we preferred a more-primitive version of his planeswalker character design. 6/6 pic.twitter.com/lc9yHlIaR5— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 5, 2018
EEF: New card.
ROSEJ: This is also super cool.
EEF: permanent -> nonland permanent
EEF: 6 2/2 -> 7 3/3
EEF: Nonland permanent -> permanent.
MDT: Are we sure we want this to say "permanent"? Blinking and stuff could make this card very unfun.
PI: Why is this permanent over nonland permanent?
EEF: Permanent -> nonland permanent
DEL: Review: Permanent versus nonland permanent? Cleaner words plus general answer versus risk plus feel-bads with land destruction.
EEF: Added "an opponent controls" so it doesn't blow up your own stuff on an empty board. I think there are more positives at nonland.
Awesome flavor. Powerful effect. Not too oppressive and allows the game to play out naturally. Generally in the past, we have seen artifacts that act as removal sit on the battlefield and their controller activates them at some point to destroy something when they deem it worthy. We found it interesting and enjoyable to play around with a strong enters-the-battlefield effect on a more expensive design. And as you can see above, we were very conflicted as to whether this should be able to destroy lands. What do you think?
We wanted to have a good variety of regular creatures, bomb creatures, enchantments, artifacts, you name it! But we also wanted everything to be answerable, to let new players know that in this game, every problem has a solution. 2/8— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 3, 2018
This is easier said than done in in five monocolor preconstructed decks! Not every color has access to the solution to every problem. Fortunately, as an experienced Magic designer, I had encountered this situation before. 3/8— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 3, 2018
That card was a little overcomplicated. It was a mana rock and a Vindicate in one. Universal Solvent from Aether Revolt had more clarity of purpose, and the concept was very resonant, recalling ancient alchemy as well as Dungeons & Dragons. 5/8 pic.twitter.com/mz0b1dzn2C— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 3, 2018
The problem we discovered in playtesting was that it had an oppressive effect. Nobody was going to be dumb enough to play their bomb creature when their opponent had one of these on their side of the board. Games were dragging out, and we wanted quick, yet interactive, games. 6/8— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 3, 2018
What we needed was an artifact that triggered when it entered the battlefield to destroy a permanent. We really didn't want to junk up the card with a whole other ability, so making it an artifact creature was a natural choice. 7/8 pic.twitter.com/lswojie7ek— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 3, 2018
(We changed it to "*nonland* permanent" so @CubeApril wouldn't flicker it to blow up everybody's lands.) 8/8— Ethan Fleischer (@EthanFleischer) July 3, 2018
EEF: New card from Aaron Forsythe (who else?)
EEF: I'm concerned that this is just busted with Tormod's Crypt-type effects.
AF: Yeah, this can't make a Bat for each creature. I think this is clear, but it could check at end of turn as an alternate template.
EEF: "a creature card" -> "one or more creature cards"
ID: Potentially broken depending on what there is to do with it. Let's look for combos.
EEF: What does this do with dredge decks?
AF: When you dredge a Golgari Grave-Troll, you get a Bat.
MJJ: Scrapheap Scrounger is nice with this. Two Bats per activation (one on the cost, one on resolution)
EEF: FFL suggests trigger once on end step. Or a tap ability that's conditional somehow?
EEF: Now triggers on each end step.
DEL: Trigger condition changed back, have fun.
This is a good example of restraint in Magic design. The initial card proposed was mostly unbounded and could make a 1/1 Bat for each creature card exiled from your graveyard. A deck with mostly creatures and Desecrated Tomb could use Tormod's Crypt to generate a ton of Bats earlier than we would be comfortable with. While it was suggested to go to a design where you would only get a maximum of one Bat per turn, we were able to find a middle ground and let you try and get a few Bats a turn. Go compromise!
EEF: New card from Mark Heggen.
DOUGB: Should I be able to transmogrify my own indestructible creature? Wheee, I'm an ox farmer.
ELI: Can the wand transmogrify them into Dinosaurs?
EEF: Cows are funnier than Dinosaurs. Changed this from an Equipment to a regular ol' artifact.
ABRO: Goats > Oxen in magic whimsy
EEF: I don't think a 3/3 should be a Goat though.
EEF: A lot of discussion about what the funniest card type is for this. Ape and Elephant are possibilities. Maybe we're supposed to introduce a new creature type here?
EEF: 2 to activate -> 3
EEF: Now uses charge counters.
EEF: 3/3 Ox -> 2/4 Ox for greater Oxiness.
AF: Now that this has only three charges, can it be cheaper to activate?
EEF: 3 to activate -> 1.
DEL: "non-Ox" removed from the targeting restriction
Most of the discussion surrounding this beauty of a design from our resident product architect, Mark Heggen, centered around the funniest creature type to transmogrify things into. Mark started with Ox, and even though many other types were suggested, ultimately, he had hit the ox right on the head. I'll leave you with this final tidbit: due to the length of the card after it picked up some charge counters, it lost its originally submitted flavor text, "Into the pasture with you." Nice try Mark, nice try.
Until next time,