War of the Spark has HOW MANY PLANESWALKERS!?

OmegaLolrus

Mburn7 said:

Seeing as they are doing a Walker-in-every-pack for War and the balancing and design of recent sets has been pretty good, I see no reason to think War will go badly.

Which, devil's advocate, is different than it going great.

I generally think it will turn out okay, but I've got my concerns. They've said a bunch of times that planeswalkers are the hardest cards to balance and tweak.

...and if the new Angrath is super OP, I won't complain.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Mburn7

Well, looks like most of the walkers can be done as Supports with an activated ability (that costs a shield or 2)
There will be 3 Mythic-Rare walkers (4 if you count the buy-a-box exclusive Tezz), so we probably won't get a crazy amount here (hopefully)


https://magic.wizards.com/en/products/warofthespark/cards

OmegaLolrus

Yeah, they've said the three mythics are the "main" characters of the story, so I'd expect to see Liliana 5, Bolas 3, and Gideon... 4? I think Gideon 4. Possibly Tezzeret 4 (he's mythic, but he's also the buy-a-box).

I'd like to see them done as a support that becomes a silver (or something, not something matchable) node. You're only removing shields from them by A: using the ability they provide or B: landfalling into it, to remove a shield.

That way they're a little more special than your average support.

But that's just off the top of my head. There's lots of ways to do it. But, I think, we can at least rest easy that there won't be 36 more Walkers coming our way.

Gabrosin

I doubt there is anyone out there who thinks we need a fifth Liliana or a third Bolas or a fourth Gideon.

Mburn7

Gabrosin said:

I doubt there is anyone out there who thinks we need a fifth Liliana or a third Bolas or a fourth Gideon.

I agree, but since it looks like the new other walkers will be rares/uncommons with less than 3 abilities I find it hard to believe that Oktagon will do the extra work to make one of them instead.

Gabrosin

Mburn7 said:

Gabrosin said:

I doubt there is anyone out there who thinks we need a fifth Liliana or a third Bolas or a fourth Gideon.

I agree, but since it looks like the new other walkers will be rares/uncommons with less than 3 abilities I find it hard to believe that Oktagon will do the extra work to make one of them instead.

Probably not.  They could use this excuse to dig up desirable walkers from Magic's history, but I doubt they will.

OmegaLolrus

Gabrosin said:

I doubt there is anyone out there who thinks we need a fifth Liliana or a third Bolas or a fourth Gideon.

A third Bolas might be able to do something interesting, but I'm not sure what more space we have design wise for Liliana or Gideon... *shrugs*

James13

Gabrosin said:

Mburn7 said:

Gabrosin said:

I doubt there is anyone out there who thinks we need a fifth Liliana or a third Bolas or a fourth Gideon.

I agree, but since it looks like the new other walkers will be rares/uncommons with less than 3 abilities I find it hard to believe that Oktagon will do the extra work to make one of them instead.

Probably not.  They could use this excuse to dig up desirable walkers from Magic's history, but I doubt they will.

It's really not up to them, but up to the IP holder/owner (WotC/Hasbro) who has to OK all their content decisions.

Brakkis

I expect them all (except the mythics) to be creatures, not supports.

Gilesclone

We need a Lilliana 5 like we need another... Gideon.

All these Gideons, Nissas and Lillianas and we can’t have one decent Chandra?

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Mburn7

starfall said:

Gabrosin said:

Mburn7 said:

Gabrosin said:

I doubt there is anyone out there who thinks we need a fifth Liliana or a third Bolas or a fourth Gideon.

I agree, but since it looks like the new other walkers will be rares/uncommons with less than 3 abilities I find it hard to believe that Oktagon will do the extra work to make one of them instead.

Probably not.  They could use this excuse to dig up desirable walkers from Magic's history, but I doubt they will.

Let's have Jace the Mind Sculptor. He might be a mono who can actually compete with all the triples.

Would he?  Not sure if his ult would just be a literal "you win the game" like it is in paper, but since decking isn't a thing here I can't imagine another way to port it over.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Laeuftbeidir

starfall said:

Mburn7 said:

starfall said:

Gabrosin said:

Mburn7 said:

Gabrosin said:

I doubt there is anyone out there who thinks we need a fifth Liliana or a third Bolas or a fourth Gideon.

I agree, but since it looks like the new other walkers will be rares/uncommons with less than 3 abilities I find it hard to believe that Oktagon will do the extra work to make one of them instead.

Probably not.  They could use this excuse to dig up desirable walkers from Magic's history, but I doubt they will.

Let's have Jace the Mind Sculptor. He might be a mono who can actually compete with all the triples.

Would he?  Not sure if his ult would just be a literal "you win the game" like it is in paper, but since decking isn't a thing here I can't imagine another way to port it over.

You're right, Oktagon can make anything as powerful or as weak as they like. Let's not speculate about anything.

You can say a lot negative about this games attempt to translate cards, but the Win the game clauses (or lose the game) have mostly been implemented in a good way.

OmegaLolrus

Gilesclone said:

We need a Lilliana 5 like we need another... Gideon.

All these Gideons, Nissas and Lillianas and we can’t have one decent Chandra?

For the love of all that's holy, please, another Chandra.

arNero

Based on what I've seen in the spoilers so far, I can only imagine that unless Oktagon/D3Go is such an ****, the nonmythic planeswalkers are all going to be either creatures or supports.

For me personally, them being supports is more likely, given that in paper Magic, those nonmythic planeswalkers are essentially special kind of enchantment.

And ugh... another Bolas.... I can only imagine what brokennes he's about to bring to the table.

TheDude1

After looking at the non-mythic PWs in paper, it seems like they only exist as PWs to further the thematic flavor of the lore, not for any functional purpose as creatures.  For PQ purposes creating them as supports makes all the sense in the world because the PWs cannot attack themselves.  Why create them as creatures if they're just going to take up space on the (already limited) battlefield?

Think about it this way: what is the difference between this card:



And the MTGPQ equivalent of:

Support Card - Planeswalker
Shield count: 3
Your opponent can't gain life while this support is on the battlefield.
Activate 2: Create a 1/1 red Devil creature token... This support loses one shield.

Nothing!  The paper creature doesn't do anything that wouldn't be done as a support.  Paper could have created it as an enchantment, but that wouldn't fit with the flavor of the WAR set and the lore theme of PWs exhausting/losing their sparks in the war against Bolas.  So instead we get PWs that are functionally equivalent to enchantments.  I can't imagine PQ doing something radically different.

And if you're wondering about how related mechanics in WAR would be adapted, there are any number of instances where the mechanics reference support subtypes - think Lands, Gates, etc.  Creating a support subtype of Planeswalker for this set seems more of the same.

Laeuftbeidir

Well. In this game, they could also be used as the backbone of a highly interesting circle of COALITION events!

OmegaLolrus

Laeuftbeidir said:

Well. In this game, they could also be used as the backbone of a highly interesting circle of COALITION events!

Are you suggesting something along the lines of Dragon War, where an Uncommon planeswalker would get their ability added to your loyalty ability?

Because that's an interesting direction to think in.