this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2023
10 points (85.7% liked)

MTG

1921 readers
3 users here now

Magic: the Gathering discussion

General discussion, questions, and media related to Magic: the Gathering that doesn't fit within a more specific community. Our equivalent of /r/magicTCG!

Type [[Card name]] in your posts and comments and CardBot will reply with a link to the card! More info here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Problems

Personally I'm pretty unimpressed with the mechanics behind "The Ring Tempts You" in the latest UB set. Lore wise, the One Ring promises great things, but never actually delivers anything other than ruin and the mechanic doesn't deliver on that. While I understand the argument that being a removal magnet is a downside on it's own, I don't really buy into it and at the very least, it's not enough of one on its own. As it stands, The Ring is simply all upside as far as I see it.

Additionally, the allowance of multiple ring-bearers (one for each player at the table) is a huge flavor fail. It's The One Ring, not The "Everyone gets one" Ring. This leads to my resolution of these issues -

Solution

My quick and dirty fix is that the Ring should be a unique effect per game that only one player can hold at a time, and an exchangeable boon like Monarch is, changing sides as the bearer is killed off.

It could still power up like it already does and obviously benefit the player controlling the ring-bearer, but adding the possibility of unwillingly giving that benefit to your opponent is very in line with The Ring lore-wise. This would also add some practicality to killing the ring-bearer instead of just removing the biggest threat on the board, which is the de-facto play in any game of Magic.


As I said, I am no game designer so I'm probably overlooking things, but I feel like this would work much better than the mechanic that we got. And while I obviously don't foresee any errata's coming from WotC for this, if I do play with LTR casually in paper, I'd probably suggest this fix as an improvement over the rules as written.

What do y'all think? Would this be an improvement? Or do you think the mechanic is better as-is?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

@socialjusticewizard @Ech effects like that only balance in limited, in wider formats the better answers to ringbearers are very unlikely to be relevant.