5 ms·

It is fun to see how much of this overlaps with the official guidelines for colors [0]. I think that the five colors are better explained in terms of deck strat

It is fun to see how much of this overlaps with the official guidelines for colors [0]. I think that the five colors are better explained in terms of deck strategies and win conditions. Crucially, by design, no color is best, nor is any combination of colors best. White represents not dying, both by preventing damage and by healing damage. White wins by having more health than their opponents, and outlasting them in battle. Blue represents drawing the right card, mostly by drawing a lot of cards. Blue wins by controlling spells and hands. (When the article says "knowledge", note that the MTG deck in play is called "the library"!) Black represents destruction. Black wins by controlling battlefields and removing blockers. Red represents opportunities in the current moment and the random possibility of change. Red wins by playing on offensive tempo (the "upswing") and attacking vulnerable targets with instant abilities. ("Tempo" here is not quite as in music; it means playing cards turn after turn with a reliable ramping up in cost and effectiveness.) Green represents growth and the potential for planning. Green wins by playing on defensive tempo (the "downswing") and tilting the battlefield in their favor over many turns. Ideally, this system of categorizing by color works because there aren't any big strategies to winning that aren't color-aligned. "Milling", the strategy of deliberately destroying your opponent's library, is closely tied to blue and black, which are all about libraries and destruction. Keeping a "zoo", a battlefield full of mid-range on-tempo creatures, is closely tied to red and green, which are the two colors tied to tempo. [0] https://mtg.gamepedia.com/Color https://mtg.gamepedia.com/Color

gpderetta 6y ago
> Crucially, by design, no color is best Except for blue of course.
- ayakura 6y ago
  If I play blue, no fun for you! - Teferi
- GuB-42 6y ago
  It was definitely the case in the early days. It is evidenced by the "boons", cards that cost 1 and do 3 of one thing the color is supposed to do best. The white one, Healing Salve, is very weak, it has later been replaced by a strictly better card. The red (Lightning Bolt), green (Giant Growth) and black (Dark Ritual) are very solid cards and were seen in most decks of their respective colors in the early days of Magic, would be a bit too powerful today. The blue one, Ancestral Recall, is part of the "power 9": the 9 most famous, overpowered and expensive Magic cards. It didn't make it past the ironically called "unlimited" edition. https://mtg.gamepedia.com/Boon https://mtg.gamepedia.com/Boon
  - saghm 6y ago
    > The red (Lightning Bolt), green (Giant Growth) and black (Dark Ritual) are very solid cards and were seen in most decks of their respective colors in the early days of Magic, would be a bit too powerful today. I don't think those three are super comparable; Dark Ritual is much stronger than Lighting Bolt, which is much stronger than Giant Growth. Dark Ritual has purposely not been printed in a "standard legal" set since 1999; it's not legal in the Modern format (cards printed in standard sets since 2003), only in formats that allow cards from any time period. Lighting Bolt is legal in Modern, with its last standard printing being in 2010, although the head designer has indicated that they wouldn't print it in a standard set now. Giant Growth was printed in a standard legal set just last year, meaning it's still currently legal to play in the Standard format (roughly speaking, cards printed in standard sets in the past two calendar years).
    - bernawil 6y ago
      Dark Ritual was banned for as long as I remember (I played extended during 2003-2006). It's pretty much the definition of an OP card: if you were to draw 2 copies and a strong creature it'd be almost imposible to lose that game.
      - YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago
        Dark Ritual was OP because of the abundance of BBB or 2B threats that it could plomp on the table on turn 1, most famous of them being Necropotence, of course, followed closely by Phyrexian Negator or Bad moon and a swarm of black weenies and with honourable mentions to Stupor or Duress + Ravenous Rats (Stupor and Duress not being threats, but still it sucks to lose two cards on turn 1 before you can do anything about it). It's interesting to note that when the ability to produce a lot of quick mana with a sorcery was shifted to Red, two of them (Seething Song and Rite of Flame) also got banned (in Modern).
        gpderetta 6y ago
        yes, the ability is so strong that even significantly weaker variants got banned. Interestingly even the third most powerful boon is powerful enough to be a multi-format all star. The last two of course... are not.
- YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago
  Right now it's green closely followed by white. Though I've been too busy to play in the last two months and have so far totally missed Ikoria, it's clear to see that Jamie Wakefield's favourite colour of magic has finally become OP just by the June 1st banned and restricted list: https://magic.wizards.com/en/game-info/gameplay/rules-and-formats/banned-restricted https://magic.wizards.com/en/game-info/gameplay/rules-and-fo... Three of the six cards (still) banned in standard are Green and two of them (Oko and Once Upon a Time) are also banned in Modern.
  - gpderetta 6y ago
    Oh yes green (and GU) has seen a huge boost in the last year of so. It was probably an overcompensation for what was perceived to be the weakest color. I expect white to go through a similar overcorrection in the next year of so. Blue is still the strongest color in Legacy and Vintage I think, even if the last few sets had a huge impact. Also, Oko and Uro are also blue.
    - YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago
      >> Also, Oko and Uro are also blue. True, and as you say UG is a powerful combination, which is also kind of a new thing for me. Those bans are a pain in the ass. They do it to hamstring the OP decks, which I understand and applaud, because nothing sucks more than having to play 4 copies of the same deck in one event. But then, because a bunch of us are using the same cards in our goofy rogue decks, these decks are also screwed and that ends up reducing diversity also. E.g. the ban of Fires of Invention has just screwed up my RW Giants deck. I mean, it's a Giants deck. About the only thing that made it viable at all was Fires.
Izkata 6y ago
I'd put blue down to slightly more generic "manipulation and control". It's the primary place for counterspells and other ways to screw with the opponent.
- Kednicma 6y ago
  Both you and the other reply are focused on blue. I wonder if HN has an affinity for thinking with blue? Yes, you're all quite right. The word often associated with blue's style of play is "control", and in tabletop card games, control is about restricting what your opponent can do. Control often doesn't directly remove creatures from the battlefield (like red and black can do), or buff your creatures (like white and green), but instead directly removes your opponent's ability to introduce cards to play. Counterspell is possibly the iconic blue technique. I found this article [0] a really interesting writeup of the mechanism design. There is interestingly one other style closely associated with blue, called "bouncing". [1] While black tends to be able to permanently remove blockers, i.e. to the graveyard, blue's skill is in temporarily removing blockers back to the hand or library. In addition to being able to decisively change the course of a battle, bouncing can also provide control over several turns, because bounces prevent blue's opponents from being able to set up a proper offensive line, and force opponents to waste mana on fielding units that will be bounced. This latter requirement is analogous to how counterspell forces opponents to waste mana on casting spells that will be fizzled. [0] https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/making-magic/counter-intelligence-2005-03-28 https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/making-magic/c... [1] https://mtg.gamepedia.com/Bounce https://mtg.gamepedia.com/Bounce
b0rsuk 6y ago
There's more to these colors than your short summary says. In particular it doesn't say what colors can't do. White is really bad at destroying stuff directly unless it's artifacts or enchantments. It can destroy or tap lands, but typically ALL lands (2WW Armageddon). It's self-centered and when it affects enemies it's usually by placing rules, laws, constraints (Pacifism; cannot uptap; etc). Mass effects of various kinds are a common theme. Blue doesn't deal with combat buffs. It would rather change the rules and make them irrelevant. Black, I would say it's more about decay, death and atrophy than outright destruction. It's the worst anti-artifact, anti-enchantment color in the game and can affect them only indirectly. Black has very few buffs, it's a very negative color. Win at all costs! Red can't affect enchantments. Like fire, it often burns (sacrifices) something to keep going. It can't last long. Green is exceptionally bad at destruction and dealing damage. Its boons are often individual in contrast to white's, which is morel like a jungle than a society. Very early M:tg had cards like Stormseeker, they are notably absent in modern M:tg. One of best ways to realize how much negative space there is in M:tg is to play Shandalar, the ancient RPG set in the world of Magic. You will see very many off-color cards.
- amyjess 6y ago
  > White is really bad at destroying stuff directly unless it's artifacts or enchantments. It can destroy or tap lands, but typically ALL lands (2WW Armageddon). It's self-centered and when it affects enemies it's usually by placing rules, laws, constraints (Pacifism; cannot uptap; etc). Mass effects of various kinds are a common theme. White also has a thing for destroying creatures engaged in combat, which is both an extension of its rulesetting ("fighting is against the rules, and if you break the rules, you die") and its preference for pacifism (enforcing non-violence via harsh punishments). White is also the only color besides Blue that gets counterspells, typically with a taxing condition (e.g. "counter target spell unless its controller pays {2}"). White, like any responsible government, collects taxes after all. > Green is exceptionally bad at destruction and dealing damage. Its boons are often individual in contrast to white's, which is morel like a jungle than a society. Very early M:tg had cards like Stormseeker, they are notably absent in modern M:tg. And when Green does get to deal damage, it's through creatures. It gets straight-up buffs such as good ol' Giant Growth, plus effects where creatures get to deal damage to targets equal to their power (nicknamed "one-sided fight", after the "fight" keyword where two creatures damage each other equal to their power).

gpderetta 6y ago

> Crucially, by design, no color is best Except for blue of course.

ayakura 6y ago
If I play blue, no fun for you! - Teferi
GuB-42 6y ago
It was definitely the case in the early days. It is evidenced by the "boons", cards that cost 1 and do 3 of one thing the color is supposed to do best. The white one, Healing Salve, is very weak, it has later been replaced by a strictly better card. The red (Lightning Bolt), green (Giant Growth) and black (Dark Ritual) are very solid cards and were seen in most decks of their respective colors in the early days of Magic, would be a bit too powerful today. The blue one, Ancestral Recall, is part of the "power 9": the 9 most famous, overpowered and expensive Magic cards. It didn't make it past the ironically called "unlimited" edition. https://mtg.gamepedia.com/Boon https://mtg.gamepedia.com/Boon
- saghm 6y ago
  > The red (Lightning Bolt), green (Giant Growth) and black (Dark Ritual) are very solid cards and were seen in most decks of their respective colors in the early days of Magic, would be a bit too powerful today. I don't think those three are super comparable; Dark Ritual is much stronger than Lighting Bolt, which is much stronger than Giant Growth. Dark Ritual has purposely not been printed in a "standard legal" set since 1999; it's not legal in the Modern format (cards printed in standard sets since 2003), only in formats that allow cards from any time period. Lighting Bolt is legal in Modern, with its last standard printing being in 2010, although the head designer has indicated that they wouldn't print it in a standard set now. Giant Growth was printed in a standard legal set just last year, meaning it's still currently legal to play in the Standard format (roughly speaking, cards printed in standard sets in the past two calendar years).
  - bernawil 6y ago
    Dark Ritual was banned for as long as I remember (I played extended during 2003-2006). It's pretty much the definition of an OP card: if you were to draw 2 copies and a strong creature it'd be almost imposible to lose that game.
    - YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago
      Dark Ritual was OP because of the abundance of BBB or 2B threats that it could plomp on the table on turn 1, most famous of them being Necropotence, of course, followed closely by Phyrexian Negator or Bad moon and a swarm of black weenies and with honourable mentions to Stupor or Duress + Ravenous Rats (Stupor and Duress not being threats, but still it sucks to lose two cards on turn 1 before you can do anything about it). It's interesting to note that when the ability to produce a lot of quick mana with a sorcery was shifted to Red, two of them (Seething Song and Rite of Flame) also got banned (in Modern).
      - gpderetta 6y ago
        yes, the ability is so strong that even significantly weaker variants got banned. Interestingly even the third most powerful boon is powerful enough to be a multi-format all star. The last two of course... are not.
YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago
Right now it's green closely followed by white. Though I've been too busy to play in the last two months and have so far totally missed Ikoria, it's clear to see that Jamie Wakefield's favourite colour of magic has finally become OP just by the June 1st banned and restricted list: https://magic.wizards.com/en/game-info/gameplay/rules-and-formats/banned-restricted https://magic.wizards.com/en/game-info/gameplay/rules-and-fo... Three of the six cards (still) banned in standard are Green and two of them (Oko and Once Upon a Time) are also banned in Modern.
- gpderetta 6y ago
  Oh yes green (and GU) has seen a huge boost in the last year of so. It was probably an overcompensation for what was perceived to be the weakest color. I expect white to go through a similar overcorrection in the next year of so. Blue is still the strongest color in Legacy and Vintage I think, even if the last few sets had a huge impact. Also, Oko and Uro are also blue.
  - YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago
    >> Also, Oko and Uro are also blue. True, and as you say UG is a powerful combination, which is also kind of a new thing for me. Those bans are a pain in the ass. They do it to hamstring the OP decks, which I understand and applaud, because nothing sucks more than having to play 4 copies of the same deck in one event. But then, because a bunch of us are using the same cards in our goofy rogue decks, these decks are also screwed and that ends up reducing diversity also. E.g. the ban of Fires of Invention has just screwed up my RW Giants deck. I mean, it's a Giants deck. About the only thing that made it viable at all was Fires.

Izkata 6y ago

I'd put blue down to slightly more generic "manipulation and control". It's the primary place for counterspells and other ways to screw with the opponent.

Kednicma 6y ago
Both you and the other reply are focused on blue. I wonder if HN has an affinity for thinking with blue? Yes, you're all quite right. The word often associated with blue's style of play is "control", and in tabletop card games, control is about restricting what your opponent can do. Control often doesn't directly remove creatures from the battlefield (like red and black can do), or buff your creatures (like white and green), but instead directly removes your opponent's ability to introduce cards to play. Counterspell is possibly the iconic blue technique. I found this article [0] a really interesting writeup of the mechanism design. There is interestingly one other style closely associated with blue, called "bouncing". [1] While black tends to be able to permanently remove blockers, i.e. to the graveyard, blue's skill is in temporarily removing blockers back to the hand or library. In addition to being able to decisively change the course of a battle, bouncing can also provide control over several turns, because bounces prevent blue's opponents from being able to set up a proper offensive line, and force opponents to waste mana on fielding units that will be bounced. This latter requirement is analogous to how counterspell forces opponents to waste mana on casting spells that will be fizzled. [0] https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/making-magic/counter-intelligence-2005-03-28 https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/making-magic/c... [1] https://mtg.gamepedia.com/Bounce https://mtg.gamepedia.com/Bounce

b0rsuk 6y ago

There's more to these colors than your short summary says. In particular it doesn't say what colors can't do. White is really bad at destroying stuff directly unless it's artifacts or enchantments. It can destroy or tap lands, but typically ALL lands (2WW Armageddon). It's self-centered and when it affects enemies it's usually by placing rules, laws, constraints (Pacifism; cannot uptap; etc). Mass effects of various kinds are a common theme. Blue doesn't deal with combat buffs. It would rather change the rules and make them irrelevant. Black, I would say it's more about decay, death and atrophy than outright destruction. It's the worst anti-artifact, anti-enchantment color in the game and can affect them only indirectly. Black has very few buffs, it's a very negative color. Win at all costs! Red can't affect enchantments. Like fire, it often burns (sacrifices) something to keep going. It can't last long. Green is exceptionally bad at destruction and dealing damage. Its boons are often individual in contrast to white's, which is morel like a jungle than a society. Very early M:tg had cards like Stormseeker, they are notably absent in modern M:tg. One of best ways to realize how much negative space there is in M:tg is to play Shandalar, the ancient RPG set in the world of Magic. You will see very many off-color cards.

amyjess 6y ago
> White is really bad at destroying stuff directly unless it's artifacts or enchantments. It can destroy or tap lands, but typically ALL lands (2WW Armageddon). It's self-centered and when it affects enemies it's usually by placing rules, laws, constraints (Pacifism; cannot uptap; etc). Mass effects of various kinds are a common theme. White also has a thing for destroying creatures engaged in combat, which is both an extension of its rulesetting ("fighting is against the rules, and if you break the rules, you die") and its preference for pacifism (enforcing non-violence via harsh punishments). White is also the only color besides Blue that gets counterspells, typically with a taxing condition (e.g. "counter target spell unless its controller pays {2}"). White, like any responsible government, collects taxes after all. > Green is exceptionally bad at destruction and dealing damage. Its boons are often individual in contrast to white's, which is morel like a jungle than a society. Very early M:tg had cards like Stormseeker, they are notably absent in modern M:tg. And when Green does get to deal damage, it's through creatures. It gets straight-up buffs such as good ol' Giant Growth, plus effects where creatures get to deal damage to targets equal to their power (nicknamed "one-sided fight", after the "fight" keyword where two creatures damage each other equal to their power).