/tg/ - Traditional Games

The stereotype is that red is the most boring color to play. "It has one strategy, swing/burn, win".

This is true to some degree. I personally use to run Mono-red burn at events to save time, so I could play games and eat food on the side between rounds.

However, what these Spikes and charlatans don't realize, is just how varied red is as a color (or at least was), with a combination of strange control cards, high toughness effects, and artifact interaction (which thanks to EDH has come back full circle in the last few years).

So what is red? Red, from a flavor perspective, is the color of passion. Not unbridled chaos, like some would claim, but the color of emotion. Someone once said that love never makes an appearance in MtG, but if it ever did, it would probably fall in red (or maybe white).

Those that fall into the spectrum of red would be a person of action. Strategy plays some roll, but they wouldn't sit there bidding there time, or negotiate with the other party, instead they'd get up and do. They would also more then likely work for themselves, since red is a color that values freedom over all other things. Unfortunately, Insanity and fanaticism fall into the color as well (both traits overlapping with other colors).

Not to say they aren't loyal, those who fall under red can be loyal, but more often then not, it's loyal to ideals, not boundaries or people. Not to say a color that values self worth and personal freedoms wouldn't have it's traitors (i.e. Starke of Rath), but it isn't nearly as common as say in black.

The type of people that fall under red IRL would be the punk, the self employed mechanic, the political activist, the artist, and yes, even the dreaded SJW.

Red is also the color of the earth (a trait WotC seems to occasionally forget), and the forge. As such, creatures with high toughness, and artifact interactions aren't alien to the color by any means.

In game, red is typically fast. Fast creatures, fast spells. The best spells in red are instants, and red is easily the domain of dudes who don't give a fuck about summoning sickness. It's also, should be noted, the default color of lightning, which also adds in the sense to it's speed.

Red also in the past, has as mentioned, control elements, land destruction, and tribal effects.

Red's stereotypical weaknesses is game is it's lack of enchantment removal, it's lack of life gain, and it's lack luster performance in the later game.

Red is the typical home of: Goblinoids, barbarians, dwarves, giants, kolbolds, flamekin, satyrs, dragons, devils pheonixs, and orcs.

>>223559

>>223518

Red, the color of stone, is also the color of strength.

As this anon pointed out, many red creatures have low toughness, too show the reckless side of the color.

However, red is (or at least was) also famous for having some of the toughest creatures/cost ratio in the game. Thing's like Earth Elemental, Wall of Stone (and other red walls), Stone Hands, Granite Gargoyle showed the unmovable toughness of red creatures. It also worked well w/ red sweeper effects like Heart of Bogardan, Pyroclasm, and Inferno.

When the first simplification of the game came in Tempest, reds toughness trait was all but abandoned, in favor of aggressive tactics.

In recent years, a handful of nods have been made, showing it's still a fringe part of it's color pie, at least from a flavor perspective.

The two that come to mind off the top of my head (as pictured) are Greater Stone Spirit (a combination of Stone Spirit and Stone Hands), and Earth Savant (what Earth Elemental should have been).

Now, Red still draws strength from the mountains, Awaken the Ancients and Koth are good examples of this, along with cards like Claws of Valakut. However, these are both aggressive cards. I doubt, we will see the defensive side of red anytime soon (with the exception of the occasional fringe card).

yess i was waiting for that thread

>>223708

>post 2012

You clearly don't know what you are talking about.

This isn't even delving into multicolor.

Red in the early days, was the color of tribal interactions, with Dwarves, Orcs, Goblins, kolbolds, and even Minotaurs having tribal interactions.

Not saying there weren't other lords. Almost every tribe in FE has some form of tribal interactions (with the exceptions being Cleric, Avatar, and Homarid), but the consistency of it in red should be noted, since it would be the dominate color of tribal interactions (particularly Goblins) until Onslaught (with two notable exceptions in Invasion block).

However, not all of these were beneficial interactions. Dwarven hate for Orcs, and Orcs using Goblins as slaves were on full display for the short period of time this was a common thing. With the exception to Minotaurs, every tribe seemed to fill a niche, Kolbolds were bad, Goblins were lackys for orcs. Orcs were cowards, but efficient if needed, and Dwarves were the toughness side of red.

Sadly this was too short lived, wasn't present in Mirage (though it appears through Flavor Text), and is removed entirely after the botching of 5th, and the first simplification of the game (goblins won).

Though in the two tribal blocks, tribal hatred was once again a common thing, it was mostly between tribes of different colors.

Its too bad, because this could have made a flavorfully unique design space for red.

>>223733

>Dwarves were the toughness side of red

I must a disagree.

As far as i understand that's not be true .

Dwarves have been mostly been about evasion and burst pumps.

OR at least that is how i built my dorf deck

In the 3 or 4 creatures the dorfs get in Fe the toughest card you have is the soldier when fighting a brassclaw ork or the 1/2 lieutenant.

As this thread has already showed, Red has had a weird love/hate relationship with artifacts. In the very early days of RED, red typically interacted w/ Artifacts, usually in the form of sacrificing them for other effects (whether that was reforging them, throwing them, or eating them).

Some point though, red's only premise around artifacts became blowing them up, which fits well with the barbaric side of red. Artifact interactions became the domain of blue.

However, in recent years, red's ties to artifact has returned, and with force!

While still blowing them up. I'd discuss this more, but it's been discussed to death already in thread.

Also no one mentioned mom and dad.

>>223518

>Someone once said that love never makes an appearance in MtG, but if it ever did, it would probably fall in red (or maybe white)

Love is red. This guy from Commander and Purphoros's love for Nylea from Theros are some examples.

>>223518

>>223733

>The stereotype is that red is the most boring color to play

>Red's stereotypical weaknesses is game is it's lack of enchantment removal

>pheonixs

>SJWs would be red, the color that favors individualism and free thought and not white, the color of authoritarianism and xenophobia

>Red, the color of stone

>Red in the early days was the color of tribal interactions

>Minotaur tribal was ever an actual thing pre-theros block

Is this a fucking joke?

>>224108

>mfw reading this and also an Orzhov mage

>>224113

>Minotaur tribal was ever an actual thing pre-theros block

Anon…

It may not have had a lot of support but it existed. You're just making yourself look new.

>>224133

>implying teysa isn't going to get deported along with the viashino suck

Isperia shill gtfo

>>224135

You would have to have a clump of Golgari mold for a brain to not respect her efforts for this society.

So what if blue is my tertiary?

The very first coin flip card was printed all the way back Arabian Nights, so while the mechanic isn't technically as old as the game itself, it was introduced way back in year one.

Now, interestingly enough, with the exception of one card it RtR (which arguably should have been red) every coin flip card printed had appeared on a red card or an artifact, making it a largely exclusive red mechanic.

Incidently seven of them are also blue, but still count as red cards. It even appears on a Walker.

The first coin flip mechanic is bottle of Suleiman, which could either give you an impressive 5/5 Djinn, or blow up and deal 5 damage to you. However, this is about red cards, and the first red coin flipper is Goblin Artisans (>>223712), in which the assembly line goblins either drew you a card, or destroyed your shit (shitty unions).

Since then it's appeared consistently up until a few years ago, appearing on everything from an exclusive promo, to a tribute to the original name of the game,

to a cumulative upkeep cost. It even is two win conditions, (one being an ante card however).

It basically is a good way to represent red's chance mentalitiy, either something will work, or it won't. Also it's an easy way to implement a random effect (I'll get to random effects later). It alos sometimes allowed red to have things it wouldn't normally have (Sandswimer has removal evasion, Impulsive Manuvers and Fighting Chance give the chance for damage prevention, Game of Chaos has life gain, ect).

However, coin flips won't be around anymore. Last year, I was talking to a number of those inside M:tG at Gen Con, and couldn't waste the opportunity to ask about one of my personal favorite mechanics.

"Oh, some players just complain about it, plus who carries change anymore." That was basically the reason they discontinued the mechanic. I said it seemed shallow of a reason, and they shrugged.

I'll get to a similar reason for random mechanics in just a minute.

>One of two win mechanics (three if you count game of chaos+Krarks thumb)

>A cumulative upkeep cost for coin flip

>the infamous thumb

>one of the test names for the game was Mana Clash. This card was made as a tribute to that.

>this card plus Chance Encounter could be an instant win.

I wanna ask you all, how do you feel black has changed over time? When I started playing, there some really ingenious ways of winning that didn't even really require killing your opponent. I originally started playing black because it was the most fun out of all the colors, even if it didn't necessarily mean you were going to win. There used to be a lot more variety of decks too, it seems like discard and land control decks are extinct now.

>>224212

In tcg's, random effects and games of chance aren't usually all that popular. However, in recent years, there have been a number of cards that target things, or change control at random.

Random effects in Red, and MTG had many different idea's. Odd or Evens, card library order, and random target.

Now discarding at random, and putting things on the bottom of the library in a random order are nothing new, nor controversial, so I'm going to ignore those for this conversation.

The first card that involved a random target (not counting the MicroProse game) is Search for Survivors. It has two interesting factoids, it's the only card with the text "shuffle your graveyard", and it's the only mono red reanimator spell.

Pretty soon Grip of Chaos was printed, which made all targets random. Since then, numerous red cards have utilized targets at random.

Scrambleverse is one notorious one, in which a lot of players will scoop when played due to the longevity it could take to respond. Once in a ten man game, I saw one resolve, left to get some dinner, ate, and came back too see it still resolving.

>Possibility Storm

One of the greatest randomizers in the game

On a side not, there are a few randomize green cards in Innistrad block that involved the yard.

These work well on MTGO, but not so much irl, though I personally never had much issue with them.

I'm restarting my old Planeswalker tabletop rpg campaign and players are choosing a nonlegendary creature to base their character on, and my cousin wants to play Disciple of the Vault.

Any ideas on a black artificer? What would his motivations be? Is there any lore behind the Disciples of the Vault or are they just random Geth minions?

So, all the original and previous cuckening threads are gone.

>>225101

>>224959

As I mentioned here, Red doesn't like to be controlled. While there are plenty of hosers, and even a few can't be countered effects in red, red's distaste of control comes in other forms.

The first traitor card, or a creature that will switch sides if certain things aren't met, is none other then an Arabian Nights card named Ghazbán Ogre. Extremely popular in it's heyday, its name means "Treacherous Ogre" or something of that nature (many AN cards feature sometimes botch arabaic words, such as Kird meaning Jungle, and Erg means Desert).

However, it was quickly established as a red mechanic in Ice Age.

Which had one of my favorite creatures in the game, Chaos Lord. During each upkeep, if the number of cards in play are even, he switches sides. He also has a weird 'half-haste' ability that I've been told was meant to interact w/ Chaos Gauntlets.

In Alliances, we had the undercosted Rogue Skycaptain (another personal favorite), who required you to pay an ever increasing wage, or he was going to up and leave to greener pastures.

Another one, the Legendary Starke of Rath (I call him Nicholas Cage), will kill someone (or steal something, in the flavorful sense), then move to that players side like the dirty opportunist he is.

In Three Kingdoms, the beautiful (and possibly fictional) Diao Chan appears as a creature that, in flavorful sense, can cause two creatures too kill each other (including her).

A number of others exist, notables include Sokenzan Renegade (knowledge), Ogre Leadfoot (food), just because (Fickle Efreet), goblins (Goblin Cadets) and so on. You can even do this to otherwise loyal creatures w/ the card Fractured Loyalty, or a lengthy Custody Battle.

Other mechanics too show there minimum loyal include cards that blow up your own stuff (Efreet), or deal damage to you like Sparksmith and Brothers of Fire (though this could be argued about red reckless nature as well).

>>225403

Seems Wizards is still partially acknowledging this aspect of red.

Did you know, in the early years (and really most of the 90's), red, not white, had the most counter spells in the game after blue.

Now, the reason for this, flavor or not, is not entirely sure, but I know it started with REB, and Garfields love of making parallel cards. In this sense, it could be argued red shared it w/ blue, but got highly specialized counters (REB. Burnout, Artifact Blast) or highly unreliable ones (such as Mage's Contest).

It should be noted, sometime in development, Force of Will was moved from being a red card to a blue card (and Pyrokinesis was going to be a blue card), both showing traits of the that part of the color pie. However, at some point, it was decided red shouldn't get a counterspell that could counter anything, even if it was as inefficient as FoW (has that changed, huh?). This was the point where that started to fade as a piece of red's color pie (and the same goes for blue burn). Inicdently, one red counterspell (a highly specialized one) is legal in modern, which is Guttural Response.

>not pictured: Planar Chaos, a favorite of mine, because while it counters things, it's more of a hoser.

It does however live on in red/blue cards, but everything x/u gets a counterspell.

Next up, red coward mechanics, then we head into the wonderful world of Green!

>>224552

*topics within it>>226020

>Inicdently, one red counterspell (a highly specialized one) is legal in modern, which is Guttural Response.

>>223904

>I take it you didn't play before Time Spiral.

i started playing magic in 3rd edition…

Zurgo Bellstriker was printed with a mechanic that restricted how he could block. This mechanic for sometime was colloquially called 'the coward mechanic', and it was once fairly common among orcs and other things related to orcs.

So why is red the color of cowardice? In fact, one of reds most famous (and unkillable) legends Norin the Wary is largely famous for 'doing nothing but running away'.

Well, it would make sense that creatures that value freedom would say 'fuck this shit, I'm out', and leave the walker high and dry. This has shown, most notably through the orcs mechanic of refusing to block things they know they can't win against. Sometimes, like in the case of Goblin Goon, Orgg, and Okk, it even extends too attacking. Some of them won't attack unless others are also attacking, which shows a 'strength in numbers' mentality.

Other creatures do it different, like Ogre Recluse, who will 'hide' (become tapped) when the opponent casts a spell, some like Wildwurm or Skitting Valesk will do other things (bounce, flip down) to show they say 'fuck it'.

All and all, it shows red's ultimate desire to not be controlled, even if it's by the Planeswalker.

It should be noted: Coward is an actual creature type, but doesn't appear naturally on a single card. Instead, Future Sights Boldwyr Intimidator can turn creatures into cowards, and make them unable to block warriors, which means cowards can't block Norin the Wary ;).

This will be it for red, at least for the moment, as we move to green.

Feedback would be appreciated.

>>226965

>>226986

What's going on in this thread.

>>226986

>poor bait is poor.

>Using a full MTG char name.

>not realizing I've used the tag since 09.

>not realizing I've never put Dakkon in the name field.

I swear, do you know anything about my thread, or MtG? I assume your the same one guy who said red doesn't interact w/ artifacts, and wasn't the tribal color in the early years of the game.

Each time, not me, but other anon's call you a faggot, and say how you don't know what your talking about (remember, Aladdin was printed post 2012 guys).

Each time you get called out, you stop posting, only to reply to my next post, and when that doesn't work, you say "Your not Blackblade". While, I love the fact you bump my thread, please stop. Think of your one day future children. Do you want them knowing about this?

>>227035

Stop posting.

>>227038

>such a half-assed shoop that the name fields don't even line up

how are you this retarded?

>>227053

>>227052

forgot image.

>post deleted

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA WHAT THE FUCK

HOW ARE YOU THIS FUCKING INCOMPETENT, YOU STUPID PIECE OF SHIT

COME ON, SPEAK THE FUCK UP, DIPSHIT

HOW ARE YOU THIS RETARDED, I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO KNOW

>>227070

Not only can anyone download my image and verify that it's legit, but they can also download your image and verify its a shoop. Watch.

>>227076

Are you implying that in the shooping process, when all someone would have to do is scrub '(you)' in blue, I instead decided to copy+paste the name over the top?

I guess I've also been talking to myself, then faggot.

>mfw I see people defending me.

>mfw I won't let this go to my head.

>>227303

This is /tg/ bud, not /v/

>>227364

I haven't been BTFO at all, could you maybe be thinking of OP, who thought red had counterspells and that revised was called "3rd Edition"?

>>227375

Am I keeping you from reading the posts somehow?

>>227395

Red did have counterspells.

They were posted >>226020 right there. Are you trying to say that there was never a monored counter spell?

Also the chain of threads in which someone called it '3rd edition' was the faggot who said Red hates artifacts, who was contradicting OP.

This assblasted faggot hasn't even red the thread.

>>227402

No, red had a rivalry with blue, and artifact blast is just a variation on artifact hate.

To say that red had counterspells would be like saying it had manadorks, there are off-color abilities in every color, OP is just retarded.

He also keeps jumping around, just look at the counterspell 'example'. He claims that red "in the early years" had counterspells but he's citing examples from as early as alpha to invasion to something as recent as shadowmoor. Maybe because between those sets there hadn't fucking been any red counterspells?

Holy shit, why is /tg/ so fucking bad at magic.

>>227411

I'm just amazed that you don't seem to be able to grasp that the purpose of this thread is about the historical roles of colors, not what they do now. Did you think the color pie was set down by god and has remained unchanged in the 20 years of magic history? The pie has changed as different designers got their hands on it. Red no longer receiving any kind of countermagic is one of those changes.

The old stereotype back in the day was Green sucked, and at least during combo winter and black summer, it did.

Green is the color of nature, of strength, of community, and of wisdom. Green draws it's strength from the primeval forests, the jungle, the rain forest.

While it shares many traits with it's two neighbors, it doesn't particularly side with either of them. It shares with red it's general dislike of the trapping of larger civilization, and it shares in white it's feeling of community and 'right'.

Green, at least from a flavor perspective, is slow. It's conservative. It doesn't plan, it doesn't delve in result and consequences, it does what feels 'right'. These can contrast with white, because what white and green feel are right, can clash greatly.

Green, while fitting the conservative theme, has actually changed the least over the years. They have a few things that they don't do anymore (like untapping permanents), but ultimately, they still ramp, they still hate artifacts/fliers, they still gain life, they still drop fatties.

Due to this, this will actually probably be the smallest color I discuss. Only a few observations to go into for Green.

They just do this better then before, you might not be ramping into a Craw Wurm, but you are still ramping.

In game, green typically goes Stompy, which is where you drop cost efficient mid-range creatures, and hit face. Hoping to overwhelm the opponent. There is also ramp strategies, which is similar to stompy, but instead, you want to play HUGE guys on turn 3/4, and the first few turns you ignore player interaction to try and establish a base. Fially there is 'elf ball, which you try to win on turn three through an obscene amount of elves and mana.

Greens weaknesses are typically it's lack of variety. If someone sits down running mono-green, it's either a ganky combo deck (Elf Ball, Aluren, or Squirrel's), stompy, or ramp. All which have their weaknesses, that can easily be exploited.

The people irl that would fall into green include an umbrella of people, including the Appalachian, the luddite, the bohemian hippy, Green Peace, the explorer and adventurer. It could be argued the homeless drifter falls under green.

Green is home to Elves, Centaurs, Hydra's, Treefolk, Beasts, Druids and Shamans, Oorochi, and Saprolings/fungus.

>>227418

>Those are counterspells

Not really, they're just anti-blue. Red was never intended to be a counterspell color like blue because if it was, it would have gotten some non-blue counterspells that were actually playable. The counter-burn stuff from odyssey was just supposed to be "a red counterspell" because that's weird and off-color and mage's contest is just weird too, it's in the same place as goblin game. Stop trying to defend this.

>That's like saying green never had direct damage because it was tied to flying hate

Yes, it is. I guess it is technically a 'direct damage' spell, but that doesn't mean that one of the characteristics of green is "dealing direct damage". That's just not true.

>>227489

>D-don't bully me, let me be wrong

The color pie has changed, yes. But it looks like you don't even fucking know how it changed. Like when you were talking about red, you didn't even mention how it's now the ritual color, which was originally black's thing, and don't pretend you were going to get to it when you got to black, either. I wouldn't care but it's arguably one of the more notable changes to the color pie.

>red no longer receiving any kind of countermagic is one of those changes

Gutteral Response is from 2008. That's fairly recent if you're going to talk about cards from fucking alpha, and it still doesn't mean red gets countermagic.

>>227490

Come on, let's see some details. I'll be waiting for you to fuck up again.

>>227521

> Red counterspell autism

You don't seem to understand the concept of qualifiers, or granularity of design. Just because counterspells weren't primarily red, does not mean that red wasn't a counterspell color.

Red got counterspells when they targeted things red hates, or did so in a red way (randomness, burn). Ergo, counterspells were on-color in red.

Are you going to try and claim that flying isn't on color in red? Blue gets way more fliers and effects that grant flying than red, does that mean red was never intended to have flying?

> Green direct damage

Again, qualifiers and granularity. Direct damage is actually a characteristic of green. The caveat is that its always tied to creatures via the fight mechanic, or tied to flying hate. A small characteristic of a color is still a characteristic.

> Color pie changing

Fucking lol, are you still under the paranoid delusion that everyone in this thread who disagrees with you is the same person? People have posted multiple times with pics showing that everyone thinks you're a retard.

> Impotent posturing.

Yeah, we all know you'll be waiting. You're probably sitting at your computer, dick in hand, slavering at the chance to inject more autism into the thread.

>>227601

>>227602

>posts within 3 minutes of each other, neither of them saged so you can bump twice

Come on now.

>off-color effects in green are actually on-color because they're present on green cards

>counterspells were on-color in red

>I-I was going to get around to rituals in black, i swear!

Please stop trying to defend yourself.

>People have posted multiple times with pics

Your imaginary friends don't count, anon.

Also

>A painter's servant deck based on pyroblast effects

>2-for-1ing yourself just to counter spells

Please stop being retarded, just for once. Look at what you're doing.

>>227521

>Gutteral Response is from 2008. That's fairly recent if you're going to talk about cards from fucking alpha, and it still doesn't mean red gets countermagic.

http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=263503

>>227521

>>227609

>now he's namefagging for no discernable reason

>if you haven't talked about something up until this point, you'll never talk about it, which is true because i say it is

I guess OP was going to leave this thread half-finished and never get around to white cards, either, eh?

Image boards truly are the gift that keeps on giving.

>>227652

>google "why is painter's servant good"

>come back to this thread to pretend you're some kind of magic history buff

>>227660

>thinks red is a color with counterspells

>thinks red has the most tribal out of any color

>thinks thoughtlace is a good card

>MY lack of mtg knowledge

Okay bud, you've given me quite a laugh for this entire thread, and it seems like you'll never stop delivering when it comes to making yourself look retarded, so let's hear your 'theory'. Who am I?

>>227734

>No he didn't

>Yes he did!

Prove it faggot.

It's true that literally nothing ever helps your opponent in this brave new world (order), however, many remember when this wasn't the case, and enchants had the distinct drawback of either being prohibitive (in the case of black), a mana dependent activation cost, or helping the opponent.

This will be done, particularly, in pump effects. White had Crusade (and arguable Aysen Highway). Red had Goblin tribal effects (and many other as this thread showed), along w/ the infamous Gauntlets and Chaos Moon. Blue had the ever terrible Sunken City, along with Tidal Influence, and Black had Bad Moon.

So, what about Green, greens first universal green effect that pumped as a Legend from Legends named Jacques le Vert (Powerword: Jack the Green). He was basically a castle, for YOUR green creature. Now comboing w/ the bands w/ other lands (which every color got), these are effects that effect only you, and unusual trend for MtG at the time.

Now if this was the only case, that would be fine, and I wouldn't be writing this.

Now, I noticed something, while designing a Jacques EDH deck, that all the green effects of this time that pump, pump only your creatures. The two other that have this are Kaysa, and a white card called Juniper Order Advocate. The other interesting thing of these, unlike the other lords, is they also pump themselves (if the advocate is changed to a green creature).

It should be noted, many other Green enchantments effect only you, things like Thoughtleech, Familiar Ground, Roots of life, Barbed Foliage effects only opponents attacking you.

It should be noted, that this one sided ness ends after 5th edition (this will be a recurring theme, trust me), though Primal Rage from Stronghold gives only your creatures trample.

Now there are some exceptions too this. Enchant Worlds always effect all players, Living Lands effect all forests, not just yours, and Hidden Path gives all green creatures Forestwalk, but if that gives you an advantage like that, you really should win barring fog.

A note, even Battle Frenzy even pumps your guys, while every other instant effect of the time says "all".

I know I was going to post about Green and direct damage, but this is something I noticed a week or so ago, and couldn't get out of my mind.

>>228243

I checked, i don't know what the fuck this is>>227658 (You)

>Tetsuo

Manages to assassinate (pre-walker) Bolas w/ the help of other guys.

>Bolas manages to get a spark because of this.

Botched!

>Kills Xira Arien, a 1/2 Fairy

>All in all, an ok character

>plus that historically accurate art!

>Toshiro

>Ronin, Kanji, and Con artist

>Carries a Jitte banned in almost all formats/

>gets help from the most powerful Ogre to ever exist in MtG.

>literally Planeswalks without a spark.

Toshiro is the more badass of the two.