Magic: The Gathering Drive to Work Podcast - Drive to Work #330 - Storm Scale

Episode Date: May 13, 2016

Mark explains what the Storm Scale is.

I'm pulling my driveway. We all know what that means. It's time for another drive to work. Okay, today I'm going to talk all about the storm scale. Okay, so at some point I'm going to apply this to other things, but today I'm going to more talk about what the storm scale is, why it came to be, and then sort of walk through. I think what I'm going to do as an ongoing series is explore different things that I've done

and look at the storm scale of those things. It's something that I started doing in my column, and I think I'm going to mirror it here on my podcast. But first, I thought I'd spend a podcast sort of really going in depth of what the storm scale is so you understand. going in depth of what the storm scale is so you understand. Okay, so the history of the storm scale is on my blog, on blogtog, my Tumblr blog, somebody asked me a question one day, and I think the question was like, what's the chance of the mechanic storm coming back? So for those that don't know, the storm mechanic was a mechanic that first showed up

in Scourge, I believe, designed by Brian Tinsman. And the idea behind the mechanic was a mechanic that first showed up in Scourge, I believe, designed by Brian Tinsman. And the idea behind the mechanic was that it counted the number of spells that had been cast this turn, and then it copied that spell that many times. So if, let's say I had a spell that did one damage to a creature or player, if it had Storm, then you copy the spell as many times as there's been spells that turn. Okay, so sounds innocuous enough. Turns out

you can do some pretty broken stuff with it, and so Storm ended up being a bit problematic. So, somebody asked me what's the chance of Storm coming back to standard? And I said, well, not really good, because Storm is maybe the most broken mechanic we've ever made. I mean, it's got some competition, but it is up there. And it's a mechanic that we originally

did in Scourge, and then we brought back in Time Spiral Block, and every time we've done it, it's ended up just being pretty broken. What we've discovered is, if the spell, if doing the spell many times wins you the game, then any Storm spell, no matter how innocuous it seems, ends up being pretty good. So anyway, somebody asked me about that, and I said, oh, you know, not real likely. And so somebody then asked me about a different mechanic. And I made a joke. I go, well, you know, using the storm scale, storm being a 10, and the idea was from 1 to 10, 1 being very likely and 10 being not so likely. So I just used the idea of a storm scale to talk about how likely something was to come back to standard. And it became

something that became this ongoing thing on my blog where people wanted to know, okay, this mechanic, what's the likelihood of this mechanic coming back in a standard legal set again? And the storm scale was born. Funny thing in retrospect is, I'm not sure at the time why I made

one likely and 10 unlikely. Uh, I think if I had to do all over again, that the expectation is the reverse. That, uh, that one would be unlikely and 10 would be likely. But anyway, uh, the scale set up the way it's set up. So it has to do with how likely it is to return. So, um, anyway, we're sitting here in traffic because for some reason there's a, there's a, uh, truck that is to return. So, anyway, we're sitting here in traffic because for some reason there's a,

there's a truck that is not moving. Anyway, maybe you guys get extra content. Hold on. Got to get out of the way of this car. Okay, sorry.

As always, the rule is driving comes first on my podcast. So, whenever there's a choice between driving safely and giving you guys up-to-date podcasting, I stop for a second to drive correctly.

So anyway, the car is passed. Okay, so today what I'm going to talk about is... So basically what happened was the storm scale sort of evolved over time. It's something that sort of gained the life of my blog and sort of just went from there. It became something people asked all the time. And eventually I decided to write an article about it for my column. And in my article, I went and started describing it in a bit more detail. And so today is a lot of, based on the article that I did, sort of talking about in more

detail what each thing means. So we're going to walk through and we're going to talk about examples and then sort of talking about in more detail what each thing means. So we're going to walk through and we'll talk about examples and then sort of explain in greater detail sort of how it comes about. So okay, so let's begin. So once again, one is, it's a scale of one to ten. One is the low end. One means you're likely to see it return. So okay, so level number one. We'll definitely see again, most likely in the next set. So examples I gave was flying, death touch, scry. So one, basically what we call evergreen mechanics. These are mechanics that you pretty much can ensure you'll see it in the next set because you saw it in the last set. So evergreen, I've done podcasts on evergreen mechanics. Evergreen just

means it's something that's available to us and we tend to use all the time not every every not every evergreen mechanic is in every set but mostly they are flying being probably the biggest poster child like what's the chance of seeing flying soon really really good because every set you've ever seen has had flying in it so when do i expect to see it again really soon um so level one is basically like, I believe you're going to, like, that's the, of our scale. It's like, yeah. When are you going to see flying again? You'll see flying again pretty soon.

So when I say level one, it's something that I consider to be just we do all the time. And I don't know, that one's pretty straightforward. Okay. Level number two. We'll definitely see again, but not necessarily right away. And my example here were cantrips, hybrid mana, double-faced cards.

So these are what I call deciduous mechanics. And what that means is, any set has access to them, but not every set uses them. Hybrid being a perfect example. Hybrid, anybody who wants to use hybrid, any designer that wants to use the hybrid mechanic, it's open to them. It's available. Any set can have hybrid in it.

Not every set will have hybrid in it. It's not something that's always used, so it's not evergreen. Deciduous means that you don't know when you'll see it. Maybe you'll see it in the next set. It might be in multiple sets in a row. Maybe you won't see it for a little while. It depends on, you know, where the use is. But if you said to me, will we see hybrid, you know, is hybrid mana a thing we'll see again? Yeah, of course we'll see it again. We might not see it right away, but we'll see it soon. And it'll eventually happen. You know, cantrips, double face cards, the kind of things now that are just like,

okay, these are tools available to us. The mechanics, I mean, in some level, deciduous. I mean, the mechanics and tools, depending on how you want to count them. But anyway, if you're level two, that means, yeah, yeah, yeah, I believe you're going to see it again.

I have every confidence you'll see it again, but less confidence in level one. Level one is more like, it's just something we use all the time, so I know you're going to see it. Okay, level number three. We'll most likely do it again probably many times. My examples here were cycling, flashback, and landfall.

So what these are, are just, there's certain mechanics we've made in magic that are just good mechanics. They're just are, are just, there's certain mechanics we've made in magic that are just good mechanics. They're just good, solid mechanics. And I have every confidence to believe we'll just do them again. Cycling, for example, has been repeated, I don't know, four times. Cycling's just come back a bunch of different times. Flashbacks come back a bunch of different times. You know, it's like, are we going to see cycling again? Oh, of course we're going to see cycling again. Are we going to see flashback again?

Yeah, yeah, I think we'll see flashback again. I mean, these are just good staple core mechanics. So level three is, yeah, this is a mechanic where it's not evergreen, it's not deciduous, it's not something we do all the time, but it's enough of a cornerstone of a solid mechanic

that I have every belief that we will see it again. Okay, level four. We'll most likely do it again, but they have issues that make them less of a guarantee. My examples were morph, kicker, and imprint. So what that means is, these are mechanics that I have faith in, I think are good mechanics. I'm pretty sure you'll see it again.

But the reason they're four instead of three is... I'm not quite as sure. There's some issue to them. Morph, interestingly enough, by the way, I stick it here. Morph really... So there's a caveat I've got to explain, which is... As you become familiar, you go up in your chance of us seeing it. So, for example, Morph really isn't a four if I just introduced it tomorrow.

It's a pretty complex mechanic. But it's something that Magic has sort of done a couple times. You know, one of the things familiarity can kind of bring you down in the scale. But in general, the idea here is, yeah, I think we're going to see this again. If you ask me if imprint will see again, yeah, I think we will. It's got some issues, meaning the reason it's a 4 and not a 3 is, well, I can imagine a scenario where it doesn't get used again. But I'm

pretty confident. I think we'll see it again. If you said to me, you know, is Concentrate of the Last Time we'll ever see the morph mechanic? I'm like, eh, I doubt it. You know, it has a lot of history with the game. Kicker is a similar place.

So level four is more like, level three is like, they're good, they've proven themselves, yeah, I think they'll come back. And level four is, well, they're good, I have faith we'll see them again, but there's something about them that makes me go, well, maybe, maybe, maybe,

you know, under certain circumstances, maybe it'd be a problem. We wouldn't have a return. So that's what level four means. Okay, level five is we need to find the right place to bring it back, but I'm optimistic.

My example there was evolve, monstrous, morbid. So these are mechanics that I think are good mechanics, but they require the right positioning. What that means is, in order to bring back monstrous, for example, I need to have a world in which things kind of evolve to become more dangerous. In order to have evolved back, I need something where there's a sort of flavor of things evolving over time. You know, morbid has to come back in a world where somehow death matters.

Now, do I think we'll find worlds like that? Yeah, I do. Level 5 means that I'm pretty sure that the chance of that happening is good. Not guaranteed, obviously. If it was guaranteed to be a level 3. But, I'm,

like I said, I'm optimistic. I do think it'll come back. Do I think you'll see Monstrous again? Yeah, I do. Evolved? Yeah, I do. These are just good mechanics. Usually the difference between a level 3 and a level 5 here is these are a little more narrow in their flavor. Like, the one thing about something

like cycling or flashback is it's pretty open-ended. The name is pretty open-ended. You know, there's a lot of places I could use something like cycling or flashback or something like monstrous just requires a little bit more support to be able to use it. So that's why it's a five. Okay. Level number six, We need to find the right place to bring it back, but I'm a little less optimistic. The example here was Devour, Ninjutsu, Living Weapon. Okay, so these are ones where the mechanic was a good mechanic, but it definitely has a trickier use for it. You know, Devour requires things eating other things, but it's not just a flavor thing. It also

mechanically, Devour requires a little more support with it. If you want to have a world where things are eating other things, it entails more than the design. It's a lot easier. I mean, it's not that the level 5s don't require some support. They do. Level 6s require a little bit more support.

So when you ask me about them, I'm like, well, okay, I think I can see this coming back, but it's just a little bit trickier. It just requires, like living weapon, for example, requires to have a germ token, a zero zero germ token.

Well, okay, a germ token, there's a bunch of things that go into that. It's a little bit more complex. So level six means, yeah, I think we can get to that. I think we can. But I'm less confident. And so, you know, this is like, I mean, level six still is, okay, you know, you know, I, I mean, I don't know where the line gets drawn. Obviously, there's 10 things you could, like, obviously, if you divide it in half, five and below,

probably means I'm pretty optimistic one day we'll see it. And six and above means I'm a little less sure. But this is, like, just on the borderline of a little less sure. Like, if you told me we'd never do Devour again, I'm like, okay, I could imagine us never doing Devour again. But

of the mechanics list, I'm like, well, you know, there's a much better chance maybe we would do Devour. Level number seven. It's unlikely to return, but possible if the right environment comes along. For example, we're Snowman over Trace and

Split Second. So those are mechanics that all have some problems with them in different ways. So mechanically, there's some issues we have to come with. And they have a huge flavor connection. Like, Snowman is like, okay, it needs to be a set that cares about snow. That's just not just any set. There's a very strong need for that.

Split Second, for example, is a mechanic where, okay, it has a lot of sort of bags that comes along with it. So seven is, I don't think, if I was a betting man, I'm like, well, I'm not sure that's coming back. But I do recognize if the stars align, there's a chance. If, for example, we did a really snowy world and we really needed some quality of snow to it hey we have the snow mechanic available to us it's something we could use and so you know in the right circumstances if you said we're ever going to see snow mana again i'm like oh i'm not sure but i'm not going to say no i can imagine the world would come back but it just needs the right environment.

Okay, so level eight is it's unlikely to return, but possible if the stars align. Madness, echo, suspend. Now, madness, we'll talk about it in a second. What that means is it's like level seven, which is, wow, something has to line up for this to work, but it means there's even more issues at hand. Let me talk about Madness, for example. Although, interestingly, Madness did return. So being level 8 doesn't mean you can't return. It just means the stars have to align.

Things have to line up perfectly. Madness is the perfect poster child for that. We were doing a set in which the major theme of the set was Madness. It was about people going insane. And we had a mechanic about insanity called It was about people going insane. And we had a mechanic about insanity called madness, about people going insane. And so, you know, it's hard to say, okay, the set's all about madness. And we have a mechanic that literally is about madness,

you know, but why was it an eight and not a seven? Well, there's a lot of baggage that came with it. Developmentally, we made some mistakes the first time we did it. There were some rules issue with it, you know, and that it required, it's the kind of thing that you ask me in the vacuum, like, do I think this is going to come back? Well, problematic. It, A, it needs a very, it's a very narrow window where it makes sense, and B, it has problems with it. So level eight says, okay, hey, for starters, it's kind of a narrow window to use it. And okay, we really, really have to want to use it because there's issues that have to get resolved. Now, madness was such the perfect fit. We said, okay, can we make the rules issues? Can we figure them out?

We did. Can we figure out the developmental stuff? We did. We solved the problems we needed to, but it had a lot of problems. And that was the kind of mechanic that all through the set, even though we put it in an exploratory design, everybody knew that maybe it would get cut at any moment. It was definitely a mechanic that no one had faith. Even when we knew it was a madness-themed set and it was in the set, there was still some doubting of whether or not it would make it all the way through.

Okay, level number nine. I never say never, but this will require a minor miracle. Phasing threshold clash. These are mechanics that just didn't work out the first time. That really, A, they weren't

particularly popular with the players. Like, I think the level 8s are people liked them. Like, madness was popular. We knew if we brought madness back, we would excite people. This, I'm not saying no one loves phasing or threshold or clash, but not as much.

They weren't as popular. And by the way, we did look at threshold for Shadows over Innistrad. So it's not like level nine we won't look at. Once again, it kind of fits what we were doing, but we ran into the same problem the original threshold had.

And it's why it's level nine, which is, look, mechanic had a major issue the first time around. The reason I don't think we'll do it again is, I mean, it both wasn't popular enough to try to figure out the problems.

Like, it had problems, and it wasn't popular enough really to solve the problems. Madness, at least, hey, there was some cachet to bring madness back. Less so to threshold. I don't think there's as many people going,

Yay, threshold is back. Not none, but not as many. Okay, level 10 said, I never say never, but this will require a major miracle. Storm, dredge, affinity for artifacts. These are mechanics that basically were broken first time out. Not necessarily unpopular, because broken mechanics can be quite popular. But these are mechanics that just were broken first time out. Not necessarily unpopular because broken mechanics can be quite popular.

But these are mechanics that just really, really cause problems with the game. And so, like, are they going to come back? Like, wow. That's... You know, you're playing with fire. Do I think we're bringing Storm back? I'm not saying we'll never bring Storm back, but wow. We're playing with fire.

So this is where I stick mechanics that are, like, cause major issues the first time we did them around. So this is where I stick mechanics that are like, cause major issues the first time we did them around. So level 10 is kind of like, okay, yeah, you know, yes, the stars would need to align. Like we need to go, okay, this is just the perfect way to bring it back. And we'd have to have some major, major problem solving. So if I put it at level 10, I'm pretty confident it's never coming back.

That it just was inherently broken. But, once again, I tried to get Affinity for Artifacts back during Scars of Mirrodin. I knew it was problematic. I knew it was dangerous to be brought it back. I still argued, let's see if we could bring it back. So nothing is off limits in the Storm Scale.

Even it being at 10, that doesn't mean it can't happen. It just means the chances are really, really small. Okay, so now, let's talk about some caveats about the storm scale. Because there's a bunch of things that when I do it, I want people to understand. Okay, so caveat number one, the

scale is completely my opinion. So, I mean, I obviously have been working on magic a long time. I interact with R&D. I do take into account what I know about R&D, meaning that, for example, Infect used

to be lower. I think at one point I graded it like a four, and I've since upgraded it to like a six. And the reason is when I talk to other R&D members about efficient development, they're really skittish about it. I'm like, oh, okay, this is going to be a little harder to bring back than I thought. So it does involve,

it's my opinion, but I do take into account what I know about other people. So if I know that other designers and developers are skittish about it, especially development, I know it's going to be are skittish about it, especially development, I know it's going to be harder to get back. I'm aware of that. But this is not, I don't quiz everybody.

It's not like every time I do the Storm Scale, I say, okay, let me run this by everybody. No. My opinion, so if I'm off, I'm off. It's me. Blame me. This is sort of what I think. This started on my blog as a thing for me, so this is definitely my opinion. Now, given I'm the guy that leads design, I'm the one that is most likely... It's not that things can't come back during development, but usually design is the one

that figures out things that make sense to return. There are times where development wants to return something, and so occasionally things come back to return. There are times where development wants to return something, and so occasionally things come back to development. But especially anything above five, the six isn't up. Wow, if I've not set an environment that makes sense for it, it's a lot harder to get it back. So those are a lot more difficult.

Usually I will consider them before we get in. Things below five is the kind of thing that like, hey, I like a mechanic that we know is a pretty good mechanic that's proven itself. Let's bring it back. That's a lot easier for development to bring in later in the process. But like, oh, here's a mechanic you kind of got to build around. It has to sort of perfectly align. That's much less likely to show up during development.

Okay, number two, the scale is in flux. And what that means is in fact for the perfect example I thought one thing I was pretty confident I liked it a lot I thought we'd bring it back it was very popular

the reason I stuck it at a four originally was it had a little bit of issues I knew but didn't break standard

it was very popular now it was also hated but once again for those that know me or listen to any of my stuff you know if a mechanic is really beloved and hated, my word, um, I will bring it back because I, I like things that are divisive. You know, I like things that like evoke strong response,

even if I don't want everybody to hate it, I wouldn't bring it back. But if some people don't like it, but some people really, really like it, um, then I think it's important. We get to my lessons. This is one of my lessons learned when we get there. Anyway, things will change over time. I will learn things. That's a good example where I didn't realize how much certain elements of development

really disliked, in fact. And that made me realize, as much as I thought it was fun and people liked it, okay, well, if I put it in a file and development doesn't like it, that means they could take it out. So I revised it. I said, oh, okay, this is going to be a harder time coming back than I realized.

That's why when people ask me to do something and do it off the top of my head, I don't go back and look what I did last time. I'll just give off the top of my head. So there's a little bit of flux. In general, by the way, it's not like every mechanic has a clean and clear place it goes. I'm giving kind of my opinion. And even then, by the way, I've identified each of the levels. That doesn't mean I won't sort of like, to me, it's a sliding scale.

So I'll kind of gauge where it goes. I might stick it somewhere. And then when I look at sort of how I designate it, it's not a perfect fit. Just something like, well, given a 1 to ten, this is where I'd stick it. But it also means that if you ask me one day and ask me another day, hey, there might be some variance. Hopefully not that much variance. Hopefully I'm not saying it's a three one day and an eight the next day, but I can say six and then say seven, and that's very possible. Okay, the scale is not based on advanced knowledge. That's very possible.

Okay, the scale is not based on advanced knowledge. So one of the things I realize is I know things. For example, madness. I knew madness was coming. I completely knew it. I knew it was in the set. So when people ask me madness, I don't want to base my storm scale on advanced knowledge because I don't want to give away things that are coming.

So the way I function is I ignore what I know and just say, okay, given how I feel about it, what do I think its chances are? Now, whether or not the stars align and something happens, it doesn't matter. Like, if you ask me, what do I think the chances of madness kind of in general vacuum, like, wow, not really good. You know, it's an eight. Like, you know, wow, it'd have to be the perfect environment

and we have to solve a lot of problems. So it's not impossible, but unlikely. I believe that. Even though I happen to know that circumstance happened, and it's in the set. I knew it was, when I said it was an 8, I knew we were doing it, but I still believe it falls in that category.

So, if you don't use the storm scale as a sign of whether things are or aren't returning, I'm not using advanced knowledge to set the scale. Okay, not everything fits perfectly. I try to give descriptions to give you an idea of things. Be aware that when I put things on the scale, I'm not necessarily trying to match the descriptions of the levels.

I'm just trying to give you a sense of, to me, it is from 1 to 10. Like, okay, given that this is 1, this is 10, that's kind of where it falls. So it's not necessarily... I want to give you concrete examples for each one to give a general sense, but it's not like they have to exactly match my description to fit in it. It is a scale.

Finally, I'm fallible. It's possible that you'll ask my opinion, I'll think something, and I'm just not aware of something or I'm mis-evaluating something often people will ask me something and I'll forget something and then they ask me again

and I remember and the storm scale comes like it's radically different I mean sometimes it's me getting new information sometimes me just forgetting something I'm human I'm fallible okay

so when I look at the storm scale what am I looking for so let me talk about qualities that I'm human. I'm fallible. Okay. So when I look at the storm scale, what am I looking for? So let me talk about qualities that I'm looking for. I think there are four qualities and I have scales on these qualities. The reason I made these qualities is when I made the article, I wanted to really walk you through why exactly something has a chance to come back or not come back. Okay. So first off is popularity. So I divided this into three categories. There's very popular, there's popular, there's liked, and there's unpopular. So one might ask me why three of them imply people liked it and one implied they didn't like it. Why not two and two?

And the answer is, it's not enough to be liked. That our goal is to give you stuff we think you like. The bare minimum of mechanics we make you is we think you like them. And so being liked is not enough. Once again, I'll get to my podcast, talk about how you want to love something. I want things that are very popular, at least popular.

I don't just want things that, eh, people like them. I shoot higher than that. So what popular means is when I look at data, we ask people what they think about things and they fall in a range. So popular or very popular means you're in the top 25%. I mean, of the range of things we look at, you're in the top 25%. Popular means that you are in the second 25%. So you're above the halfway point, but not in the top 25. Like means you're in the bottom half, but on the top half of the bottom half. Unpopular means bottom 25%.

The reason I rank things I do as far as names is, I believe that if you look at the kind of mechanics that fall in the liked category, I don't think people dislike them. I think if you ask people in general, they go, okay, yeah, I don't mind that. Where if you get to the bottom front and they're like, oh, I didn't like that. So basically, if you are unpopular, your chance of coming back is really bad.

If you're liked, merely then popular or very popular. Like, if you're very popular, that increases your chances. People like you. They want you to come back. If you're popular, that's good for you. It's the kind of thing that if we think about you, it sways us in wanting to use you.

We're very popular. It self-pulls you to get back. Liked isn't helping you, but it isn't hurting you. It's more like, well, this is not a positive thing for you, but it's not a negative. Unpopular is a negative thing. That if you fit other criteria because

you're unpopular, you really need to do well in other categories to come in. Design space. Large, medium, and small. Basically that says, how many cards can I design with you? Large means I believe I can keep making magic cards so that the cows come home. There's a lot of space for you. Medium means there's an end, there's a finite amount. I can keep making magic cards so that the cows come home. There's a lot of space for you. Medium means there's an end, there's a finite amount. I can make at least a couple large sets with you. But it's possible after two or three large sets that I might start running into problems. Now be aware, the longer I don't, like, mechanics, the issue about how much design space is, the farther apart you are.

Like, if I do a set and then wait 10 years to revisit it again, I can do more revisiting of things I did the first time just because a lot less players have even played with it before. But medium means I can't bring you back too often, you know, in big sets as a major mechanic just because I'll run out of space. Small means, wow, I used you in one set. Probably that's the best you're going to do.

Maybe I can eke out a little bit more, but there's not a lot of design space there. So large means that's in your favor. Small means that's against your favor. And medium means, eh, it doesn't really push you one way or the other. It's something to be aware of. Okay, next, versatility.

So this is flexible, neutral, and rigid. So flexible means I don't need any support. This mechanic stands on its own. I can drop it in any set. Neutral means a little bit harder to use. Maybe it requires a little bit of support, but not so hard. Well, rigid, it's very hard to use, maybe requires a little bit of support, but not so hard. Well, rigid, it's very hard to use. It requires extensive infrastructure to make use of. And so the idea is if you're flexible,

that's a huge plus to you. If you're rigid, that means, okay, not that I can't use you, but wow, there's a lot more parameters that I have to think about. Okay, next. Oh, there's five qualities. Development.

Are you not problematic? Are you neutral? Are you problematic? Not problematic is development is like, no problem. We made it. Wasn't a problem before. We can have you back. Neutral means, well, had some issues,

but probably not things that maybe aren't addressable. Problematic is, oh, this know, this mechanic had some problems when we did it. It caused some, it, it, it broke in some way developmentally. Um, now once again, a problematic mechanic can come back, but it's kind of like a madness. Like it says, oh, okay, we have some baggage on you. You have to think about the baggage. So problematic really says to you, okay, if we bring you back, like development's got to get sign-off. And development, anytime development's made something

that broke previously, they're skittish about it. Not that they won't do it. We do bring back mechanics that were popular but problematic. But it just makes it harder to do. Finally, playability. This is a miscellaneous category,

and it's either playability not affected or playability affected. And what that means is there's something about the mechanic that has some problems with it about how it played. It's kind of a catch-all thing. I kind of use it when I want to talk about sort of, sometimes

there's a mechanic that you want to bring back that, oh, there's an issue with it and it doesn't quite fit in the other categories, that there's something about it that you've got to be aware of. And so it's not a developmental issue. It's not a popularity issue. It's not a flexibility issue. It's kind of my catch-all. I don't know if I'm having a good example of this, but it might be something. Usually it just involves some sort of design thing. That's why it's my general thing. Okay, so let me, I'm almost to Rachel's school today.

So let me sort of talk about what my plan is with future podcasts. It's something I'm doing with my column, which I'm going to mirror in my podcast, which is to do storm scale podcasts. Probably the first one I'll do, and these aren't going to be consecutive, just an ongoing series I'll do, is I'm going to take a look at a set and then walk through,

usually a block. I'll look at a block and say, okay, looking at this block, what do I think the storm scale of mechanics are? And what I'll do is I'll walk through all those different choices. Like, okay, how does it rank in each of the five scales? How does it rank in popularity? How does it rank in design space? How about versatility? How about development? Development. How about playability? How does it do in each of those things? And then sort of walk through and then give an overall scale

so you can understand. One of the things you'll find as I go through them is not all qualities of the scale are necessarily the same. And each of the individual things are a scale unto themselves, which is, when I say it's developmentally problematic, there are things that are problematic that are a little problematic and things that are really problematic. scale into themselves, which is, when I say it's developmentally problematic, there's things that are problematic that are a little problematic and things that are really problematic. Meaning there's things in which design or development might say to me, we don't think

we can make that thing work. Wow, that's really a problem. And the other thing they go, well, it was a problem, but I have some idea maybe how we could fix that. And so there are a range of things. we could fix that. And so, there are a range of things.

The other thing that, one of the things you'll find out is, it also has to do with sort of, like popularity plays in this one, just sort of like, how exciting would people be to see it come back? You know, we're willing to sort of

put a lot of our energy in if we think it's a selling point on the set. We knew madness could's a selling point on the set. We knew madness could be a selling point on the set. So we said we take some energy to try to make it happen. Now, the funny thing about this whole thing is the Storm Scale was one of those organic things for my blog that, like, I didn't really set out for it to be a thing. It kind of, I kind of backed into it.

But over time, it ended up being a very interesting tool one of the things I like a lot about my blog is I try really hard to figure out what all you want to know and a lot of my blog is adapting to that and as I figured that out the storm scale became something that became a really big thing in my blog because people want to know what are the chances of something that became a really big thing in my blog, continues to be, because people want to know.

They want to know what are the chances of something that I like, usually I like, maybe I dislike, coming back. And so, and like I said, I did the article. My response to the article is really, really positive, so much so that I'm going to start doing storm scales. Like my plan is every year as sets rotate out, I'm not sure whether I will do, I'm still trying to figure this out. It probably will be set block by block, but it might be year by year. I still haven't figured it out. I think, actually, probably it will be year by year because I think I can do two blocks at once. The con scale took me, I only did one block, but I also was explaining the storm scale in pretty great detail.

I won't need to do that in future things. I'll just have people, they can link back to the original article so they can, if they also was explaining the storm scale in pretty great detail. I won't need to do that in future things. I'll just have people they can link back to the original article so they can, if they don't know the storm scale, they can read this to get all the detail. Essentially what I'm doing today, I had to do in my article and that took up half my article. So I'm planning to probably once a year I think like

I'm not sure when it'll be when my state of the union is, but my state of the union every year or sorry, state of design, which is like State of the Union. My State of Design, I want to talk about two blocks a year. So it's possible that somewhere around there, I will then do the Storm Scale where I talk about chance of things coming back. I'm also going to start doing some older Storm Scales where I look at old Magic sets and sort of talk about them. I'm going to try to group them together in groups that make sense. By the time you read this one,

I'm planning... The first one I'm planning to do that probably will have written before this comes out, I think, is I'm planning to look at the guild mechanics from Ravnica, original Ravnica

and Return of Ravnica and sort of talk about the guild mechanics. But anyway, this is something that I plan to do on a regular basis. And I decided that if it makes sense to do it in my column, it makes sense to do it in my podcast. The one nice thing about my podcast is I always have more space than I do in my columns.

So it just gives me more opportunity to really explain how things work. I can go in greater detail. You know, I only have 3,000 words in my column where I have way more, way more than 3,000 words in my podcast. So anyway, so the next one I will do, since it's the one I did already, is I will do a Stormscale Kanzatark here. We will see, by the way, I don't know, if I talk in detail, I'm not sure. Well, we'll figure out how much space each one takes. Anyway, like I said, I don't know, if I talk in detail, I'm not sure, well, we'll figure out how much space each one takes. Anyway, like I said, I'm almost to the end of my, to my daughter's school. Final thoughts on the Storm Scale, which is, oh, is this, which is, for those that are involved in my blog

or interact with me on social media, when I sort of experiment with things like the Storm Scale, and you like them, let me know. One of the reasons I really sort of, this evolves into a pretty giant tool, was a clear communication from the audience that they liked it, that they thought this was something that was neat. And so I consider the Storm Scale to be a big success of social media. I mean, it's something that sort of I got inspired by all of you. You really liked it.

You latched onto it. It became a thing. And that I am very receptive to try to find new and different tools to help communicate to you things you guys want to know. So the reason the Storm Scale exists is because you guys are interested in it. So please, if you follow me on social media, I mean, I'm constantly trying things like this out. If you see something that you enjoy and you want to see more of it, let me know. Because I'm more than happy to start working on other things.

So this is, anyway, the Storm Scale is something that you can do. So please just let me know. Anyway, I'm now at my daughter's school. So I know what that means.

It means the end of my drive to work. So instead of making magic, sorry, instead of talking magic, it's time for me to be making magic. So I'll see you guys next time. Bye-bye.