Blood Tyrant

Multiplayer Implication Subtlety

New 19 Sep 2016 Asked by su92 34 Comments

Were Blood Tyrant and Withengar Unbound also controversial with their "Whenever a player loses the game" implying multiplayer?


The implication is a little subtler.

Multiplayer Card Design

New 06 Jun 2011 Asked by julesrobins 0 Comments

Over the past few years we've been seeing a lot more cards designed explicitly with multiplayer in mind: the summer multiplayer products, Blood Tyrant, Exanguinate, etc. To what degree do you think cards that may be played primarily in duels (i.e. Suture Priest in NMS limited) should be worded to be better in multiplayer? Is there a downside?


The downside is that sometimes wording cards for multiplayer makes them more confusing in two-player play. Many players don’t even think of the idea of there being more than two players so cards or wordings that don’t make sense in two-player play confuse them. We do want to support multiplayer play when we can but there are issues such as basic comprehension that keep us from always maximizing cards in multiplayer play.


Portions of Marodigest are unofficial Fan Content permitted under the Wizards of the Coast Fan Content Policy. The literal and graphical information presented on this site about Magic: The Gathering, including card images and mana symbols, is copyright Wizards of the Coast, LLC. Marodigest is not produced by or endorsed by Wizards of the Coast. All other content © 2024 Webscape Internet Engineers. All rights reserved.