Magic: The Gathering Drive to Work Podcast - #523: GDS3 Trial 2, Part 3

Episode Date: March 30, 2018

In this podcast, I go over the answers for the final 25 questions in the Trial 2 multiple-choice test for the Great Designer Search 3.

I'm pulling out of my driveway. We all know what that means. It's time for another drive to work. Okay, so the last two times I was doing the multiple choice test, trial two from the Great Designer Search, and I got through 50 of the 75 questions. So I thought today, let's do the other 25. Okay, so the next question, question number 51, talks about a card called Junk Pile Engineer. Converted mana cost of three. A lot of these cards have no mana cost, because I'm going to ask you questions about them. But it has a converted mana cost of three.

It's a creature. It's a human artificer. It's a 3-2. And for two and sac an artifact, look at the top X cards in your library where X is the converted mana cost of the sacrificed artifact. Put one of them into your hand and the rest on the bottom of your library

in a random order. So question number 51. What are the most appropriate colors for this card? White, black, blue, red, black, red, red, white, green, blue. Okay. Well, first off, it's something that sacrifices artifacts.

Red is the color that most often sacrifices artifacts. It then basically does an impulse type thing. That is blue. Blue tends to do that. So when you combine them together, red and blue is the best answer here. So B.

This is a card that maybe could be mono blue, but I didn't give you that choice. And the sacrificing artifact part and sort of the overall engineer feel definitely sort of gets you into red blue territory. Okay, question number two. What is the most appropriate rarity for this card? So this one's interesting. The card is not common. There's way too much going on for it to be common. It's not mythic rare. So really it's a question between uncommon and rare. So the card lets you draw a card every turn.

Or lets you draw a card, not every turn. Let's you draw a card multiple times. And so usually things that are repeatable card drawers, we have to be careful about. This card is pretty aggressive in its cost, converted mana cost of three, means that we're looking like we're pushing this card for maybe for constructed. So in general, when we tend to push things for constructed to not mess up limited, we tend to push them up toward Rare. So it can net you a lot of different cards.

It has a lot of sort of combo potential. It's the kind of thing you can build a deck around. And it seems like we're probably pushing it toward Constructed based on the Converted Mana cost. That tilts it toward Rare. So the answer for this one is Rare. Okay, question number 53. Which of the following changes is set design most likely to make? A, change the number of cards looked at to a lot number rather than caring about converted mana cost. B, give the creature haste. C, make the power and toughness the same. D, add the ability

to and tap put an artifact card from your hand onto the battlefield or E. Put the cards revealed into the graveyard Okay, so a couple things, let's see Give the creature haste, that doesn't really add much to the card The card is more about utility than it's about attacking Make the power and toughness the same There's not a lot of value to that Add the ability to and tap put an artifact card from your hand on your battlefield. That might actually break the card.

You're constantly grabbing things. If you can then circumvent costs, that is probably problematic. Put the cards revealed into the graveyard. That's something we could do of the things there. Something we might think about. If the set had a graveyard theme that mattered,

if somehow being in the graveyard was relevant. I mean, that's something we would think about. The reason it says revealed, by the way, a lot of people were really harped on revealed is if the cards went to your graveyard, meaning they go to a public zone, we would have you reveal them, not look at them, because they're going to a public zone. So if they went to the graveyard, you would reveal them. That's all that was saying. Some people thought there was some more hidden deep meaning into that, but no, it's just,

I'm just referencing that if it's going to a public zone, you wouldn't look at them, you'd reveal them because everyone's going to see them anyway. So A, change the number of cards looked at into a locked number rather than caring about a converted mana cost. In general, one of the dangers when we make cards is having us, the more open-ended you get, the more potential danger there is. And you're always looking out to figure out, A, is there a way to make things simpler and cleaner? And is there something that is inherently less dangerous? And so the idea there is probably we would clean it up. It makes the template shorter. It makes it easier to process.

So the idea there is probably we would clean it up. It makes the template shorter. It makes it easier to process. And it just means there's less balance problems down the road. So A is the correct answer. Change the number of cards looked at to a locked number rather than caring about a converted mana cost. Okay, the next card is another next question based on a new card. Dead Man Walking.

So no mana cost. It has a converted mana cost of 7. Creature, Shapeshifter Wizard, 1-1. When Cardim enters the battlefield, return target creature card from any graveyard to the battlefield under your control. All your creatures then become copies of that creature. What are the most appropriate colors for this card? A, blue-black, B, blue-red, C, black-green, D, red-green, E, green-blue. Well, this card reanimates something that is primary in black, secondary in D, red, green, E, green, blue. Well, this card reanimates something. That is primary in black, secondary in white. And white tends to reanimate small things.

And then copying things usually is done in blue. I think white has done a little bit of it. So anyway, black is number one in reanimation. Blue is number one in copying. So blue, black is clearly A is the answer for this card. Okay, what is the one in reanimation, blue is number one in copying, so blue, black is clearly A, is the answer for this card. Okay, what is the most appropriate rarity for this card? A, common, B, uncommon, C, rare, D, mythic rare.

Um, so this is a pretty big effect, it's pretty splashy, um, so this would be mythic rare. It is way, way too much for a common. We don't do reanimation a common. It's a bit too much of an effect even for uncommon. So the real question is Rare, Mythic Rare. We like Mythic Rare to be something that has a big effect that can really have a giant impact and it's something that just seems really cool. Also, if it's something that you can sort of really build around, there's a lot of stuff where we'd like to push it mythic if it just has that extra something

oomph. And this is a pretty extra oomph card. So mythic rare is the correct answer. Okay, so question number 56. What change wouldn't design make? Give the creature flash. Have it only get creatures from out of your graveyard. Have it only get creatures out of your opponent's graveyard.

Have the return creature, D, have the return creature be sacrificed at end of turn, or E, make it a 0-0 creature. Okay, A, give the creature flash. Well, blue is primary in flash. Black happens to be secondary in flash. You guys put in no that. We have since added both green and black

are now secondary in flash. It's something we've done recently. Not that anybody was expected to know that for this test. Blue's primary and flash. So even without knowing black can do flash, now blue can do flash. So that could be easy for us to do. B, have it only get creatures from out of your graveyard. That is something we could do.

If the card ended up being a little powerful, we could consider doing that. C, have it only get creatures out of the opponent's graveyard. Sometimes we do that if there's combos that you can set up that are a little bit too good. You can't plan what's in your opponent's graveyard. So it lets you do cool things, but a little less planned. So maybe we would do that. D, have the return creature be sacrificed at end of turn. Black has done that before.

Black has done, you know, reanimation and then you sacrifice the creature. It doesn't do it tons, but it could do it. E, make it a 0-0 creature. The problem is if the creature is a 0-0 creature, it instantly dies. It's not intuitive. We tend not to make ETB creatures that are 0-0. But essentially, if it's going to function like a sorcery, we would just make it a sorcery. There's no reason to make it a creature.

And so there's not a lot of value to that. So make it a 0-0 is the correct answer, E. 57. You're designing a set that returns to a plane we've been to before and plan to have humans, wolves, and spirits. Which world would be most appropriate? A. Amonkhet. B. Innistrad.

C. Ixalan. D. Kal A. Amonkhet. B. Innistrad. C. Ixalan. D. Kaladesh. E. Zendikar. Well, this is a little bit just about knowing the sets. So it turns out that Innistrad, B, has five factions it cares about. One is humans. One is werewolves and wolves. And one is spirits. Also vampires

and zombies. So that makes the most sense. It has three creature types that are relevant to the set in it. I think Zendikar, it's possible that Zendikar actually has humans, wolves, and spirits show up on Zendikar, but they're not as relevant as they are. In Innistrad, those are three relevant creature types that are tribally cared about. So Innistrad is clearly the answer to that B. 58.

Which of the following attributes can a card in a standard legal set not mechanically care about? A. Card subtypes. B. Card supertypes. C. Expansion symbol. D. Mana cost. E. Power toughness.

Okay, so card subtypes are like creature types. We care about creature types all the time. Card supertypes are like legendary or. We care about creature types all the time. Card supertypes are like legendary or basic. And we make a bunch of cards that care about things like that. Supertypes can be cared about. D is mana cost. We don't do it tons, but we can care about mana cost. We often will have cards reference things mana cost or trigger off things mana cost.

So D is possible. E is power and toughness. We often will care about power or toughness. Not often we care about power and toughness, but sometimes we do. Usually we pick one or the other, but we can care about them. They're both things we can care about. Expansion symbol, that is something we can no longer care about. The reason for that is the rules are whatever a card's name is, all cards with that English name are mechanically the same. But we have made

cards that show up in different expansions, but they're reprints. So, there are different versions of cards that have different expansion symbols. And since the cards have to all have the same information, that can't be something, it turned out it's not something we can care

about. Now, once upon a time, Magic did care about it, back when the rules were a little different about this. Arabian Nights, for example, had a card that destroyed all cards from Arabian Nights. Homelands had one, Antiquities had one. They were cards, I think, that were made, Richard made them, Richard made the one in Arabian Nights, mostly because he said, oh, what if I can't get access to this expansion?

Oh, well, just get this one card, and then I can not worry about the expansion if I'm concerned about the expansion. I think that's the idea. But we've since realized it was problematic. The way it works in Oracle now is the card literally names every card that's new to it.

It no longer destroys mountains, by the way. If you had an Arabian Nights mountain, it used to destroy it, but a City in a Bottle is the card, and it no longer does that. By the way, for those little trivia questions, City in a Bottle was the name of an episode, an issue of Sandman, which inspired...

Oh, actually, was it called City in a Bottle? It was about a City in a Bottle. It might not have been called City in a Bottle. But anyway, it was about a City in a Bottle that had an Arabian Nights flavor to it, and Richard read that comic and inspired him to make Arabian Nights. A little extra trivia there for you.

Okay, question number 59. Which of the following abilities is R&D least likely to put on a mono-red creature in an upcoming set? A. Mana. Card name gets plus one, plus one until end of turn. B. Card name must attack if able. C. When card name enters the battlefield, you may return target sorcery card from your graveyard to your hand. D. Tap, draw a card, then discard a card. E. Creatures you control have haste. Well, A is what we call fire breathing.

Usually it's a single red. Sometimes it's one and a red. Not always plus one, plus oh. Sometimes it's one R, plus two, plus oh. B. Card name must attack if able. That is a downside that we most often do in red. C. When card name enters the battlefield, you may return target's sorcery card

from your graveyard to your hand. We don't do this one a lot, but red cares about sorceries and sets like graveyard sets where sorceries matter, we let red regrow sorceries. E, creatures you control have haste. Red is primary in haste. It's primary in granting haste. So, A, B, C, and E is all stuff that you can do. All stuff red can do.

D, tap, draw a card, and discard a card. So, red... blue is something called looting. This is what looting is. Tap, draw a card, discard a card. Red, we decided to give looting to red, but we call it rummaging, and it's slightly different. In red, you discard the card before you draw the card. So in red, if we tap, discard a card, or discard part of the cost, discard might be part of the cost, but anyway, you discard a card before you draw the card in red. Early, early on, before we sort of figured that out, we did have a few looting cards

in red that worked this way, but we don't do that anymore. Red is now discard before you draw. The reason we like to do that is we like to differentiate abilities and colors, and we like that red is a little bit more reckless in how it does it. Also, because red burns and red has aggro strategies that are a little bit faster, looting is a little bit stronger in red, so having a discard helps balance that. Okay, 60. According to the current design standards, which of the following enters the battlefield

effects is least likely to show up on a common creature? A. Destroy target enchantment an opponent controls. B. Return target creature card from your graveyard to your hand. C. Target creature can't block this turn. D. Where's D? Hold on a second. D. Target creature gets plus two, plus two until end of turn.

Or E. You may return target creature to its owner's hand. So which of those wouldn't we do? Or which are we least likely to do a common? So A, destroy target enchantment opponent controls. We would do a common. C, target creature can't block this turn. We would do a common. D, target creature gets plus two, plus two until end of turn.

We do a common. And E, you may return target creature to its owner's hand. We will do a common. The one we are least likely would do a common. D, target creature gets plus two plus two until end of turn, we do a common. And E, you may return target creature to its owner hand, we will do a common. The one we released like a do a common, we used to do a common, but we stopped doing a common, is B, return target creature card from your graveyard to your hand. What we call the gravedigger effect.

Gravedigger being the first one to do it, way back in Portal slash Tempest. So gravedigger, what we found was when you put it at common, you can use So Gravedigger, what we found was when you put it at common, you can use one Gravedigger to get back another Gravedigger. And so if you get two of them out,

you can do this endless thing where it becomes an endless blocker that we don't really like. So by putting it uncommon, there's just a much lower chance that you get two of them, or you get multiples of them so you can get two in your hand at one time.

So we've moved that up to uncommon. So B, return target creature cards from your graveyard to your hand is the correct answer. Okay, question number 61. Which of the following sets isn't designed around factions? A, Amonkhet, B, Ixalan,

C, Kanta Tarkir, D, Ravnica, E, Shards of Lara. Every test you've got to have a few gimmies. This is one of the. D. Ravnica. E. Shards of Alara. Every test you gotta have a few gimmies. This is one of the gimmies. Much like the... I thought the Humans, Wolves, and Spirits was pretty much a gimme. Okay, so... Ixalan is four tribal factions.

Kansa Tarkir is five wedge factions. Ravnica is ten two-color factions. Shards of Alara is five wedge factions. Ravnica is ten two-color factions. Shards of Alara is five arc factions. Amonkhet, not about factions. There were trials and things. As normal, there are, because magic has the five colors, we definitely

will connect things to the five colors, but there are no factions really connected to it. There were trials connected to it and stuff, but not factions per se. So A, Amonkhet is the right answer. Okay, number 62. Which of the following mechanics would be the best fit for the Cynic Guild from Ravnica? A, dash. B, entwine.

C, proliferate. D, rebound. E, undyne. Okay, so dash is a very aggro thing, all about you can pay a different mana cost, usually more, to be able to get haste and then bounce back to your hand. Eh, not really. The Simic is not really about aggro. B, Entwine. Entwine allows you to take two different abilities and put them together. You can cast this card for one ability or the other ability, or if you pay the Entwine cost, it does both abilities. Not really

a spell-focused color. Simic is more creature focused and caring about creatures. Yeah, it's something that probably, if anybody did Entwine, I guess Izzet's more likely to do Entwine. It's just more about doing cool effects and

more focused on instant sorceries. D, rebound. Rebound's another spell card that lets you cast your spell once and it happens again the next turn. Rebound also I guess would go in Izzet because it's more spell focused. Undying. This is the one that threw some people. So Undying, when a creature dies, it comes back with a plus one, plus one counter on it. So there is a plus one, plus one counter theme in Simic. But this is really about things dying. It's much more of a Golgari vibe, really, than it is a Simic. But this is really about things dying. It's much more of a Golgari vibe, really, than it is a Simic vibe.

And it doesn't necessarily... A lot of the things that goes on in Simic is cards putting plus one, plus one counters on other cards. So Undying Creatures, for example, wouldn't want to have plus one, plus one counters on them because in order for them to be effective, they have to die, and then they would lose the counters.

So undying is a closer fit than the other ones, but it's not a perfect fit. C, proliferate, is the correct answer. Proliferate's all about giving extra value for things that already have counters. This is a guild that likes to put counters on things, so having a mechanic that helps put extra counters on things would be very synergistic. So proliferate C is the correct answer. Okay. So the next three questions, I talk about what is secondary. Real quickly, this is what I wrote on the test. Secondary, this is the color or colors that an ability shows up in on a somewhat regular basis, but not as often as the primary, and not always in as a lower rarity as the primary.

If the effect is something we do a lot, the secondary color will usually get the ability in most sets. So I'm trying to see if you understand the idea of what's primary and secondary on the color wheel. So which color is secondary at trample? Well, an A, white, B, blue, C, black, D, red, E, green. All three of the next questions

it's Woburg order. Okay, so trample is primary in green. It is tertiary in white, blue, and black. If you're big enough you can get trample.

But it is secondary in red so D is the correct answer. Okay, what color is secondary in haste? This one's a little tricky because you have to know a little bit more. Haste is the correct answer. Okay, what color is secondary in haste? This one's a little tricky because you have to know a little bit more. Haste is primary in red. It's tertiary in green.

Because play design needs haste, haste is relevant in green for constructed. Haste is tertiary in green, but it gets used a lot on tournament-viable cards. So while it is not used in very many cards, it's used judiciously on cards that tend to show up in tournament play. So if you're just looking at it from tournament play and not from limited or from total card selection, it might feel like green is secondary in Haste, but it is not. It is actually tertiary in Haste.

Black is secondary in Haste. You can tell that because black often will have haste commons. There's more haste cards. Not necessarily unconstructed, but there's more haste cards. And the thing about being primary or secondary is it'll show up in multicolor cards and something you can grant. You'll see that in black. It doesn't tend to have haste

as it's part of a multicolor card and it doesn't really grant haste. So C, black is the correct answer. Okay, next, which color is secondary at vigilance? So vigilance is primary in green and, I'm sorry, primary in white, secondary in green. Vigilance really shows up in no other colors. So green is the correct answer, E, and there's not even... Some of the other ones, like the trample, for example,

we do allow all the colors to get trample if they're big enough, usually at higher rarities. And with haste, we do let green get haste, especially on tournament cards. But with vigilance, really, there's no other... Nobody else gets vigilance. Blue sometimes will untap itself. That's the closest I guess to another color getting vigilance. Blue did get vigilance early

in Magic. There's a card in is it Legends or Ice Age that has vigilance on a blue creature. We were deciding where to put green where to put vigilance secondarily we did this during Future Sight we realized that if we put it in blue, that white and blue just had too much of the similar overlap. They had the low power, high toughness creatures, they had the flyers, and so the kind of cards

that you end up making with it just weren't different enough from what white would do. So we gave it to green because green has larger creatures and stuff that might get used to it. So you can get, you know, white doesn't tend to have the five, five vigilant creatures where something green could make. Okay, question number 66. What kind of creature can green destroy? A, artifact creatures and flying creatures. B, attacking creatures and blocking creatures.

C, blue creatures and black creatures. D, tap creatures and enchanted creatures. E, white creatures and black creatures. D. Tap creatures and enchanted creatures. E. White creatures and red creatures. Okay, so attacking creatures and blocking creatures is something that's white, tends to be the color that will destroy attacking and blocking creatures. Blue creatures and black creatures, that is white's enemy colors, but green really isn't about destroying creatures. So just because it's an enemy doesn't mean it can destroy them.

There were some cards in early, early magic. Richard's philosophy early on was that colors could borrow from their enemies to do things to their enemies. So there are some early cards, like in green, that destroy black cards. But that's not something we've done then forever. Tap creatures and enchanted creatures. Green can destroy enchantments. White's the color that tends to destroy tap creatures. Black does it a little bit.

And enchanted creatures... I think white did that once. Black can do it because it's a subset of killing anything. But anyway, not green. White creatures and red creatures. That is green's allies. So I'm not even sure why green would destroy its allies. So A, artifact creatures and flying creatures.

Green has naturalized effects. Green can destroy artifacts. So it can destroy artifact creatures as a subset of it can destroy artifacts. And green is the anti-flying color. It's the primary anti-flying color. I guess red is a little bit anti-flying. But green is the anti-flying color. And so it has reach.

And it has a couple of effects to help deal with flying. One of the things is we let green destroy flyers. We let green destroy flyers. So the creatures that it can destroy are artifact creatures and flying creatures. So A. 67. Which of the following mechanics is not an ability word? A. Awaken. B. Delirium. C. Hellbent. D. Landfall. E, morbid. So what an ability word is, is it's a mechanic. A keyword is when we use a word and then that word has meaning

and then we put minor text in parentheses. Ability words are the word, the card doesn't actually need a keyword. It can just be written out. But for flavor reasons, to either connect cards that do the same thing or give the world an overall feel to it, we put a word before it. Usually ability words, there's an italicized word and then an em dash and then just the text that would be on the card.

So I was trying to make sure you could understand what an ability word here. The reason it matters from a design standpoint is you treat keywords differently than you treat ability words. card. So I was trying to make sure you can understand when ability word here, the reason it matters from a design standpoint is you treat keywords differently than you treat ability words. The biggest thing from a design standpoint is you can reference keyword in rule text and you can't reference ability words. What that means is I can destroy a target creature with named keyword ability. I can't destroy a target creature with named ability word. Ability words can't be referenced through the rules text. There's a bunch of other little things that matter,

but that's the biggest thing. So this is just a matter of looking and seeing which one was not an ability word. It turns out A, awaken, is actually a keyword and not an ability word. Delirium, hellbent, landfall, morbid were all ability words, meaning that you could take away the ability word and the card works just fine. Where with a keyword mechanic, usually the reminder text is helping you, but either the mechanic has more to it than the reminder text is telling you, meaning the reminder text is kind of roughly filling you in, but not being exact. Or we need to reference it. We need to do something where we need to sort of

talk about it mechanically, and so we need it to be a keyword. This question was about, do you know what ability words are, and then can you identify them? If you look them up and understand what ability words, this was a hard question. Okay, question number 68.

Why doesn't Common often have seven mana instants and sorceries? A. They make the math too hard. B. They are hard to design. C. It's too complex for beginners. D. It's too impactful for Common. E. Common creatures need to be more expensive than the instants and sorceries.

Okay, let's walk through this. A. It makes the math too hard. Not necessarily. A seven mana spell could just do a giant effect. Spending seven mana is not particularly hard on math, and it could be a simple effect. Being expensive doesn't mean it has to be a complex effect.

The math being too hard isn't the right answer. They are hard to design. Not necessarily. Once again, it's just a matter of doing an fact that has enough scope to it. They're not necessarily hard to design seven mana cards. So that's not the correct answer. C, it's too complex for beginners.

Once again, they don't need to be particularly complex spells. You can make a pretty simple seven cost spell, and if you can understand how to cast a six cost spell, you can understand how to cast a seven cost spell. Beginners don't have a problem with that. E, common creatures need to be more expensive than the instance of sorcery. There is no rule that is true. You can have expensive instance of sorceries. Obviously, we do that elsewhere in other rarities. So the correct answer is D, it's too impactful for common. It is hard to do something that makes sense for seven mana that then doesn't have a huge

impact on the board. That 7 mana spells, in order to justify being 7 mana, have to be pretty big. And one of the ways we care about rarity is how impactful it is. We want common things

to have some impact, but not too much of an impact. Because we want, you know, you get a lot more commons when you play. You draft a lot more commons. Then we want them to have impact without being too impactful. Usually things that have a larger impact,

we leave for higher rarity. So D is the correct answer. It's too impactful for a common. Okay, number 69. Which world has the most expansions set on it? A, Dominaria. B, Innistrad. C, Mirrodin.

D, Ravnica. E, Zendikar. So Innistrad, C. Mirrodin, D. Ravnica, E. Zendikar. So Innistrad had... Innistrad had... Innistrad, Dark Ascension, and Avacyn Restored, and then we went back to it on Shadows of Innistrad and Eldritch Moon. That's five. Mirrodin had Mirrodin, Darksteel, and...

Mirrodin, Darksteel, what's the third one? I'm blanking on the name. Oh, Fifth Dawn. And then we went back, and there was Scars of Mirrodin Darksteel. What's the third one? I'm blanking on the name. Oh, Fyfton. And then we went back and there was Skarsgård and Mirrodin Mirrodin Macee's new Frexit. They had it at six.

Ravnica had Ravnica, Guildpact and Ascension and we went back and had Return to Ravnica, Guildcrash and Dragon's Maze. Right and Dragon's Maze. Right, Dragon's Maze. That is six.

Zendikar had... Zendikar had... I'm blanking on names I said today. It had Original Zendikar, it had Worldwake, and it had Rise of the Odrazi. And then we went back for Battle for Zendikar and Oath of the Gatewatch. That's five. Okay, so you combine those all up, five plus six plus six plus five is twenty-two.

Dominaria, I believe, has had more than twenty-two. I think it's close to forty. So, for example, all of Alpha, Alpha and Beta were there, and then if you talk about actual expansion sets, since I say expansions, not Arabian Nights, but you have Antiquities,

you have Legends, or part of Legends, you have The Dark, you have Fallen Empires, you have Ice Age, you have Homelands, you have Alliances, you have Mirage, you have Visions,

you have Weatherlight. These are all still in Dominaria Weatherlight, finally we leave to Tempest Block, we go to Tempest for the block, Tempest well Tempest, Stronghold, Exodus we were in Tempest, but even Tempest later got shifted

so even the plane of Tempest is now on Dominaria because it got overlaid during the invasion. Then you have Urza's Saga and Urza's Legacy and Urza's Destiny. Pieces of all those take place on Dominaria. Now, Mercenie Masked Block. Mercenie Masked is not there. But I think by prophecy, you're back on Dominaria.

Then you have Invasion Block. That's all Dominaria. Then you have Odyssey Block.'re back on Dominaria then you have Invasion block, that's all Dominaria, then you have Odyssey block, that's all Dominaria, then you have Onslaught block that's all Dominaria, we didn't leave like the first 10 years of Magic, we only left a few times basically Arabian Nights was Rebiah, Homeland

was Aggrotha Tempest block was Tempest, although like I said, it's now overlaid. So anyway, the first 10 years of Magic was all Dominaria. So A, Dominaria is the correct answer here. One second. Sorry.

Okay, number 70. A linear mechanic is one that encourages players to build around a specific aspect. Which of the following mechanics is the least linear? A, Delirium. B players to build around a specific aspect. Which of the following mechanics is the least linear? A. Delirium B. Energy C. Morph D. Rally

E. Transform Okay, delirium requires you to have four different card types in your graveyard. Well, if you're going to build your deck to make a delirium card work, you might as well play more delirium cards. So it definitely encourages you to play more delirium cards. Oh, a linear mechanic, by the way, is something that encourages you to play more delirium cards. So it definitely encourages you to play more delirium cards. Oh, linear mechanic, by the way, is something that encourages you to play more. You know, it encourages you to play

a certain thing in your deck. And that, usually when we're talking linear mechanics, they tend to encourage you to play more of themselves. B, energy. Well, once you're getting energy, the more energy cards you have, the more ways you have to spend the energy. So energy just encourages you to play more energy.

Definitely linear. Let's go to Rally. Rally is a card that cares about you having allies. Well, once you have some allies, you might as well have more allies. So Rally encourages you having a lot of allies in your deck. Okay, now we get to Morph and Transform. This was where a lot of arguments had. So Morph is linear because Morph is a bluffing mechanic.

The more Morph things you have in your deck, the more mystery your cards are. The more people don't know what it is you're playing. Can you play one Morph card in your deck? Absolutely you can. People did. And it constructed when there's only one that's good. Sometimes people ran it. And it wasn't run as a bluffing thing.

It was merely run as a cheap way to get the card out. So Transform, I think the thing that threw people was a lot of Transform cards can be designed. So for example, we had the Werewolf mechanic. The Werewolf mechanic is linear and a lot of cards, a lot of Transform cards in Innistrad had the Werewolf mechanic on it. But it wasn't transform that made it linear. It was the werewolf mechanic that made it linear. The fact that they all flipped a certain way was not transform. Transform itself, for example, I can make a transform set in which transform is just mana on the front and a transform, sort of like a monstrous approach to transform. Nothing about transform.

Now, there are a lot of transform cards that do encourage you to do something. For example, Devil Wears Secrets does encourage you to play instants. There are cards in... some of the double-faced cards in Ixalan Block encourage you to do a certain thing and maybe want to build your deck to do that. The difference here is there's nothing inherent about transform that forces you to do a certain thing and maybe want to build your deck to do that. The difference here is there's nothing inherent about transform that forces you to make things. It is design choices individually you can make with transform but the point is I can make a whole set of transform cards that do nothing to make you want to play more cards. That transform is merely a means by which to

get from one side to another side. Sometimes transformed conditions can do that, but inherently it's not endemic to the mechanic to make you do that. Where morph will always encourage you to play more morph creatures. That the ability to bluff is always there. The pressure is always there. So while morph is less linear than delirium, energy, or rally, that's for sure, it is not less linear than Delirium, Energy, or Rally, that's for sure. It is not less linear than Transform, because Transform is not inherently linear. I can take any mechanic.

For example, I could take Landfall. Landfall actually is linear. I could take Kicker, for example. Kicker is not particularly linear. Kicker just says I want more mana. And having one Kicker card, I mean, I guess, even kicker is a little bit of more mana is good for me, but

what's a super... Imprint is where you have to get rid of a card. Each imprint card is very unique, and in fact, imprint cards don't really make you want to play another imprint card. They're just one of a kind. I can make an imprint card that very much makes you want to do something in particular. In fact, there are

imprint cards that make you want to do something in particular. Something being more modular doesn't mean that it can't be designed on a card-by-card basis to be more linear, but that doesn't make the mechanic linear. Transform inherently does nothing to make things

linear. It's a card-by-card decision that you can do with it. All the mechanic does is make the front side go to the back side. That, built into itself, does not inherently make anything linear. So that is what's going on here. We're testing knowledge. This is a harder question. And the reason I put transform there, by the way,

was it often gets designed in a way that is linear, but it is not inherently linear. Yes, the werewolf mechanic is linear. Yes, there are ways we executed it in Ixalan that leads you to be a more linear strategy, but that is not inherent on the design of transform. So anyway, E transforms is the correct answer. Number 71. Which of the following formats can't the card power Conduit from Mirrodin be played in?

A. Commander. B. Legacy. C. Modern. D. Pauper. E. Vintage. Turns out D. Pauper is the correct answer because it's an uncommon card that's only been printed once at Uncommon in Mirrodin, and Pauper requires the card to at one point be printed in Common. So as long as any format printed in Common, it's viable in Pauper.

But Power Conduit has never been printed in common, so it's not. So D is the correct answer. 72. Which of the following is the most important reason that some cards' mana cost is higher than others? A. Higher mana cost or hint to new players that the card is more powerful. B. So that people will play it later in the game. C. To encourage players to put more lands in their deck. D. To make players splash an additional color. Or E. To make the cards different.

So A. Hire a man across or hint to new players that cards are more powerful. Um, that's true. It's not the most important reason. It's a pretty minor reason, actually. C. To encourage players to put more lands in their deck. Um, I mean, we want to make sure people play the right amount of land,

I guess on a very minor, but once again, if true, minor at most. D, to encourage players to splash an additional color on their deck. Um, no, if we want people to splash an additional color, we're more likely to make it have a single mana in it rather than multiple mana in it. But that's not really why we do that. E, to make the cards different. This is the second most given answer, which is incorrect. There's a lot of ways we can make cards different.

The reason some cards' mana costs are higher than others, it's not about going, oh, I can just make the same card but make it a higher cost. I mean, I'm not saying it's not about going oh, I can just make the same card but make it a higher cost. I mean, I'm not saying it's not a reason. It is not the most important reason. The reason for the mana cost and the reason some things are higher is B, so that people will play them later in the game.

A lot of trying to make magic work is understanding the tempo and the pattern of when things get played and making your spells happen at the right point of the game. The mana system, one of the geniuses of the mana system is it allows the game to evolve over time and it allows the designers to have an impact and choose roughly when things are going to happen. And so the mana cost, it's very, very important that it determines when things get played and that some things get played later in the game. So B, so that people will

play them later in the game is the correct answer. Okay, question number 73. Which of the following is the most important reason for the color pie to exist? A, it adds more symbols to the game. B, it allows a wider variety of deck, of cost, sorry, of cost. C,

it encourages deck and gameplay variety. D, it expands the color palette usable in the art. Or E, it increases the number of distinct cards that can be designed. Okay, this was another tricky one. We're trying to ask some hard questions. So A, it adds more symbols to the game. No, in fact,

if we could lessen the number of symbols in the game, we would. I mean, we have the amount we need, but adding symbols is not a bonus, basically. B, it adds, it allows a wider variety of costs. It allows a wider variety of costs, but that really isn't the most important reason. D, it

expands the color palette usable in the art. No, it's not even, doesn't really even do that. We would use all, no matter how many colors the game had, they would be divvied up and Art would use all the colors. Only have four colors in the game. Sorry, no purple. That wouldn't happen.

E, it increases the number of distinct cards to be designed. This was the wrong answer that people most often gave. It is true that, I mean, I can make a card in one color and then make the exact same card in the second color and it's a different card it's in a different color we get to do a little bit of that that answer is not irrelevant

but it's not the most important reason so C, it encourages deck and gameplay diversity it encourages deck and gameplay diversity one of the things that's important, and if you ever heard me talk about the importance of elements of a trading card game, you don't want people just playing all the best cards in the same deck. You want people sort of having to make choices between things. And the color pie is really, really important

for allowing people and actually forcing people to have to make interesting decisions so that everything that, you know, it's not a hodgepodge. We want there to be different ways to play and different kinds of decks. And the color pie, that's the most important job of the color pie is that diversity. It does other things. Color pie is super useful,

but that's the most important thing it does. So the answer is C. It encourages deck and gameplay diversity. Number 74. Which of the following effects is design allowed to use on a standard legal blackboard or card? A. Affecting a future game with the same opponent. B. Having a card coexist in more than one zone. C. Making a choice secret from other players. D. Putting a card in your hand you do not own. Putting a card in your hand that you do not own. Or E. Rolling a six-sided die.

One of the ways to crack this one is to know what silver border sets do. Although I guess silver border sets actually will do all five of these. But black border sets will not. So A, affecting a future game with the same opponent. Some people seem to think Karn did this, but Karn just started it over. It doesn't affect the game. It starts it over. And it's the same game from a

like from a like magic online standpoint. What we're talking about is what the double the doubling cycle does in Unglued where I do something now and I do something in the next game with the same opponent. We don't do cards like this because digital can't handle that. It's something that I talked about. It's one of the few cycles that I... FutureSight, we were talking about doing it, and then realized it just can't be done in digital, because in digital, the games... One game does not recognize previous games,

so there's no way to have an effect that happens in another game. B, having a card coexist in more than one zone. Nope, the rules are very exact. The rules kind of do weird things if something exists in more than one zone. In Silver Border, I made yet another Aether Vortex, where a card can be

on top of your library and on the battlefield. And in Unstable, I made Mashable Ninja, that can be in your hand and on the battlefield. That's me goofing in space that really causes wonky things to happen. In fact, Mark Gottlieb, who is a former rules manager,

will not play, whenever they play drafts where people bring their own packs, he will not play if there's yet another Aether Vortex because it just does things that as a former rule manager he cannot abide by.

I mean, I've made rulings for it, but it is a lot of, there's a little bit of just go with me sort of stuff with the rules that Mark does not want to do. D, putting a card in your hand you do not own. is a lot of, there's a little bit of just go with me sort of stuff with the rules that Mark does not want to do. D, putting a card in your hand you do not own.

We do not let you do that. You can, whenever a card goes to, it always says it's owner's hand. So even if you gain control of it, if it gets bounced, it doesn't go back to your hand. It goes back to the owner's hand. So whenever we have a card go to a hand, it is never the controller. It is always the owner because we do not want somebody holding somebody else's card. E, rolling a six-sided die. That is something we've done in Unglued and Unstable. Also, I said standard legal because we do do

plane chase. Plane chase rolls a planer die, which is a six-sided die, and that is blackboarded, but that is not a standard legal. That's why we said standard legal. So C is the correct answer. Making a choice secret from the other players. Goblin Game is the one. There's more than one, but that's the one that I always remember that people are like, why isn't that a Silver Border card? I'm like, oh, Black Border can actually do that. You can actually make

a secret and not tell your opponent. Obviously, Silver Border, like stuff like Hangman and things, you know, there are cards where you make secrets. Just because you can do it in Black Border doesn't mean that Silver Border can't do it if there's, like, you can't play Hangman in Black Border. So the fact that there's secrets, even though the secret part Black Border can do,

that's why Silver Border does it. So number 75. You're designing a card with a converted mana cost of 10. Which of these card types is least likely to be? A, Artifact. B. Creature. C. Enchantment. D. Instant. E. Sorcery. And the answer is, well,

some of these we've done. In fact, I think all of them we've done but one. We have made 10 mana stuff for most of these. Yeah, we'd make an artifact, we'd make a creature, we'd make an enchantment, we'd make a sorcery. The reason we wouldn't make an instant is, if it's that big, the chance that it's something that you have to respond to,

that it's not something you would just cast, that you'd have to sort of wait and then use it in response and keep 10 mana up, it's just, by the time you're doing something that big with that big of an effect, it's just going to be a sorcery. It's just going to be something that you want to do as soon as you can do it.

And we're not going to make you wait to do it reactively. So the answer there was D, instance. Okay, guys, I've gone through the entire test. Hopefully this helps explain the reasoning behind that. Once again, I also wrote an article. If you want to read the article, I went into more detail here, so this was nice for people who want more detail. But anyway, I know there's a lot of controversy.

Every time we do a multiple choice test, there's always controversy. People are always going to get caught because they missed one question and there are always going to be questions where people feel that the answer they gave is the correct answer I will say that I'm confident in all 75 questions there were previous GDSs where I felt like maybe question 2 was closer to question 1 than I meant

I believe our right answers are the correct answers I will defend them all I did defend them all but anyway I hope you guys enjoyed these three podcasts. They were fun to do. But now I'm at work. So we all know what that means. It means it's time for me to stop talking magic and start making magic.

I'll see you guys next time. Bye-bye.