Adamant Deserved Better

[@HPuzzleYT]

I FEEL SO BARREN WITHOUT MY EFFECT FILTERS In all seriousness, this is the third straight week of something coming up that crunches me on time, so I had to make the sacrifice. The render time difference without my effects is about 2 and a half hours. I do not plan on making this a regular thing

[@Firevine]

I love how WotC's answer for the "third set problem" was to make the problem worse.

[@ILostMyOreos]

I miss three block sets so much

[@halfpintrr]

I don’t mind two block sets

[@barongeoffrey75]

@@halfpintrr you mean two set blocks?

[@halfpintrr]

@ yes

[@MIKAEL212345]

I always like mechanics that incentivize you to play monocolor or close to monocolor. Monocolor decks really highlight the color pie, but since adding another color is usually really easy to do, monocolor decks are somewhat rare

[@jjs8426]

Devotion was so good

[@emilymcpherson6564]

i wanna add to this that the original design for Adamant - the split cost between cheap/colored and expensive/colorless - would be revisited in Brothers' War with Prototype. a lot of those cards are really good in standard too!

[@justgreat1215]

I do like the idea of using Adamant to show loyalty to a cause storywise, and while it is a monocolor mechanic, introducing a couple two color cards that incentivize being monocolor but with a small splash reminds me of mono white aggro back in Ravnica Allegiance Standard

[@philoc7063]

adamant on multi colored cards is actually such an cool idea, I think that makes it way more interesting, you could even have multicolored cards that change based on if you casted with 3 of one color or 3 of the other instead of simply just the same 3 everytime, and since you cant use both, (unless its a high mana card i guess) you'd get a different effect based on what lands you have currently. I can also imagine something that does a crazy effect if you use 3 of every color to cast it.

[@flaetsbnort]

One way to use adamant I thought of would be hybrid cards that have a different effect depending on the mana spent

[@Snst-404]

Welp, lorwin (hybrid payoffs) and mirrodin (sun burst) would like to have a word with you

[@kristophermichaud4467]

I felt that they could have had a cycle that altered the cards effect based on what adamant condition was met. Like, a spell that worked different if you spent mana with all blue, all red, or both. Like, all blue could add split second to a counter spell card, where being all red would counter and copy the spell. If you were not adamant in either, you just get a normal counterspell. Adamant has a lot of creative opportunities that I feel WOTC has no time or want to experiment on ever again. They did this effect so dirty. So dirty.

[@liamwhite3522]

Concept: a 2 cmc legendary creature with Adamant, which would only activate if a card effect increases it's required cost _or_ it is your commander coming onto the field for the second time. Could even stick it on a multicolored commander, that costs like 1UB, and then it can have different results if it is cast adamantly black or blue. Since Wizards loves making cards specifically for commander

[@jaredwonnacott9732]

I would love to see a return to Adamant that includes granting Adamant to other spells (like a red cantrip that says, the next creature spell you cast this turn has "Adamant Red: When this creature enters, it gains +1/+0 and Haste") amd Adamant payoffs (like an artifact that says, Whenever you cast a spell that's Adamant, add one mana of that color to your mana pool). Simple designs that make Adamant work for more as a theme and not just a thing on a couple cards. I'd also love to see some Adamant one drops and two drops using either kicker or X in the cost.

[@emilymcpherson6564]

also, i think a way to make Adamant work as a mechanic for 60 card formats is to make it a triggered ability like Extort. something like "When you cast a spell, if 3 or more mana of the same color was spent to cast it, do x"

[@GellyGelbertson]

this feels like it would go hand-in-hand with shadowmoor's "two generic or a single color" pip

[@chromeWarriorXIII]

I think it would be interesting to do two-color cards with adamant where the card costs are stuff like W(3), and the adamant requires 3 of a specific second color. Takes it away from the original mono-color design, but it might give it more versatility. Plus, then they can use it for another new Ravnica set!

[@ENCHANTMEN_]

I think the {2/color} mana cost pips should be used more in addition to regular pips. That way multicolor can use it, but monocolor gets it cheaper.

[@durpien]

A hybrid mana cost adamant card would be dope. Imagine a dirty harry styled loose canon cop for boros/boros/red that would always loot but it would have haste if you payed the adamant or a simic/simic/green rogue researcher that would always fight on etb but would do some self experimentation and get some +1/+1 counters on on etb with the adamant.

[@levicurtis6669]

Adamant, but for modal etbs. If the adamant cost is let you get all the choices instead of one

[@fakename8414]

That's pretty dope. I also had this idea that some multicolored legendary creatures could have modal adamant etb's (which strongly aligns with your idea) corresponding to the colored mana funneled to cast them. Cast it using 3 of one color, get this effect; cast it using 3 of two colors, get both effects Admittedly, I came up with this idea for custom commanders that benefits from commander tax. But like H Puzzle have said in the last adamant video, this could work like it did with Bladecoil Serpent and Clay Champion. It coild be interesting to see adamant design that doesn't uses X in its casting

[@jpmonje1981]

i agree with the mono color adamant and then dial up the payoff, because it rewards mono color builds if it was the goal of the mechanic, and it would be format or color defining

[@ryanstudham640]

7:42 I just don't understand this reasoning, despite how common it is. Is two more sets of bad adamant cards suddenly enough to make them playable? They can't implement feedback from set one while making two and three because of how far out they work. If WOTC thought adamant would be served by mythic cards, they would have printed them. Two more sets of adamant cards only means we would have gotten more of the same, and we have no reason to believe anything else. If we had had Eldraine 2 and 3, we would have gotten Counterspell for 3U with "Adamant - Draw a card"; we wouldn't have gotten above-rate Flametongue Kavu that only does the ETB burn if it's adamant. That's just not the design space that adamant was ever going to fill; that was what adventures were for, so we got Bonecrusher Giant.

[@HPuzzleYT]

The general idea is that with 2-3 sets on a plane you can use the first set as more of an introduction to a mechanic and then flesh it out more in the following sets. You do bring up a very fair point, though, which is that you're under the assumption that Wizards is going to print good cards, which is a real crapshoot. The lack of rares and mythics was funny to me because Addendum has 9 non-Commander cards and it got two rares and a Mythic. It really does feel like WOTC just threw Adamant in as pack filler. Honestly, why not just make more Adventure cards? It's not like Adamant was a driving force behind being low color in limited anyways. There were far better reasons to do that. Apologies, I keep adding more because I'm gathering more thoughts lol I think it comes down to if the design team is actually thinking ahead about fleshing out mechanics versus just tossing them around for the sake of it. Which sucks, because I really do think there's a good amount of design space for not just Adamant, but for other mechanics in a similar boat.

[@jaredwonnacott9732]

I think the reasoning is at least three fold. One, more Adamant cards means more possibilities that they can find something that works, that makes a card playable, that impacts a format, or at least somewhat incentivises playing monocolored in draft. We've seen how one really successful cars with a mechanic is often enough to make Wizards explore it more in the coming years, and Adamant needed that. Two, more Adamant cards means that players would build around it in casual formats, just because, so it would at least get some recognition. There's not nearly enough adamant card for someone to build Adamant tribal, even as a meme deck right now. Finally, having any ability in more than one set will inherently suggest the need to push the mechanic in some way. Even with blocks, there would be different design teams on each set and they would have a different style and approach. If you're designing around a mechanic that already went out in one set, you're going to try to at least think of a few ways to make your approach to the mechanic special. I think of Morph as a great example. First set was just morph, second set added abilities that triggered when morphed. Down the road with revisits, we got Megamorph and Manifest and Cloak and Disguise, which are all basically attempts to take Morph or a Morph spin off to a new level. Revisiting a mechanic almost always gives it something interesting, both in the short and long term.

[@captianbacon]

The only one I've ever used is the bad sign in blood that comes with a food token

[@barongeoffrey75]

About your idea of cards with 2 different mana costs it has been done with Flame javeline and alikes.

[@HPuzzleYT]

I can understand why they moved away from that style of design, it would probably be a little wonky for complexity reasons and Adamant's a bit cleaner

[@ToddSnap3]

I’m pretty sure that’s just kicker.

[@Goldscorpio7]

I think that last idea would work great with hybrid mana cards

[@AuronCommander]

I could see adamant working in Ravnica. Maybe the guildless rise up causing chaos. The guilds would have two-color adamant effects, and the guildless would be adamant for colorless mana. We could get the 90th niv mizzet card and he would be adamant for 5c!

[@HPuzzleYT]

Niv mizzet having Adamant implying he's trying to help everyone's needs including the guildless would be interesting

[@amodsr]

I know it's not the topic of the video but I always felt Bushido deserved better.

[@captianbacon]

I wish we would've gotten a knight cycle would've had a were say the white one was a 4/4 for 2ww and its gets a knight token on attacking and if you paid adamant it enters with a knight so it's a relevent effect for a cost. Or make it 5cmc with 1 2/w ww

[@LightPink]

First time I've heard of this mechanic lol

[@epicdude8742]

I wholeheartedly agree adamant needs more attention, it's a mechanic I've liked and always wanted to use but there's just never been cards that are all that good at using it. I'm not so sure about the whole multicolor route, although the flavor you present there is really cool it just feels very pip heavy and demanding on your landbase. I think the real problem, particularly in constructed, is that adamant cards can't be directly better than cards with 3 pip mana costs. So as a constructed deckbuilder, why run those in your monocolor deck when you can run pure triple pip cards that by nature have better payoffs? Granted this is more an eternal format issue but c'mon, every product's a commander product now. I think the solution unfortunately would be to go the sundering stroke route, or perhaps go even more flexible with a "for each (color) mana spent to cast this spell". If this would mean making a new mechanic as a spiritual successor to adamant rather than fixing the mechanic itself, I don't think that's a bad tradeoff. Cause now you can make a card that can have a payoff for paying, say, BBBBB into it without making a prohibitive BBBBB spell. In any case, great video and like you said, lots of ways to go about this. Thank you for such a thought provoking video!

[@oscarguzman3017]

Adamant should have had some stronger cards. The red one with 4 to any target sparked my imagination a little, but it was still too much mana for a burn deck, but then there's also no other mono red deck that would want it. It would not be going into big red, so it fell just short of having a home. It would probably be a problem, but I think they could have gotten away with 5 damage to any target. It woulda been a totally fucked up card, but we're talking about the oko set, here. 😂

[@yoyoguy1st]

Honestly the card I associate with adamant is spectral procession more than any adamant card.

[@dxjxc91]

It basically comes down to: the cards needed to be okay without adamant and worth playing with it. It isn't a bad mechanic, just a poor execution. If/when this mechanic comes back stronger, people will remember that set as the set it started in and could easily see standard, comander, and niche modern/legacy play.

[@ThijsAnglim]

Adamant is a great mechanic, it was just printed on weak cards.

[@Sleep-65]

I love Adamant! xD

[@ezekielshackelford9865]

I can't read the cards that you show :(

[@ezekielshackelford9865]

And to be real it's the reason I stopped watching the video 5 mins in

[@HPuzzleYT]

Now that you mention it those are incredibly small on mobile. I'll fix that going forward!

[@danthewafflelord3059]

Honestly adamant could have been easier to use if it only required 2 of the same color

[@LibertyMonk]

Adamant also just... doesn't work on low-cost cards. If you vary it lower than 3-of-a-kind, it gets really watered down, and it's just impossible to work on 1 and 2 drops. I generally don't like the idea of varying the number/cost, it'd just become sunburst for monocolored. That's just not exciting, outside of an Engineered Explosives, but doing that for mono-colored is boring. "of any single color" is cool, but it feels like it could backfire with 3Y costs, where it suddenly becomes a *splash* mechanic. It feels like a flavor fail that something named Adamant rewards you for dipping your toes into the card's color. You'd have to limit it to cards with 2Y, possibly 2YY or 2YZ as their mana cost. You could maybe do 2XYZ but that's getting weird. Changing it to "three mana the color of the spell" might fix that, and functionally match the existing mechanic. Or you could rename it to "Resolute" or something slightly less "never change" than Adamant. It's a shame that the mechanic thematically only works in a narrow band of mana costs, in order to make sense.

[@jacobbrown9894]

“Making a food, a famously black mechanic” ???? Yes this set made them and established them as Abzan (and Turn to Pumpkins) the colors that have always had lifegain. Hell I say Abzan but I double checked and white foods was more a later thing, Food was THE Golgari thing in ELD. Like an analysis video on an eld mechanic just strikes with a joke showing a misunderstanding of another eld mechanic?

[@mnm1273]

7:30 a bad mechanic is worse than a forgettable one. A bad mechanic harms people's enjoyment of the game, a forgettable one is a neutral experience. Bad mechanics might be fun to analyse after the fact, but by definition they harm the experience for people who are actually playing the game

[@HPuzzleYT]

My reasoning for forgettable being worse is because at least the bad mechanic made an impact. I feel like, for better or worse, designs in games should be trying to push an idea to the best it can be (best doesn't necessarily mean it's a good mechanic) and when a mechanic is this forgettable it shows a failure of that, which to me is a shame. But I do understand that being "in the trenches" of it can give players a very different perspective versus talking about it in hindsight

[@spikeydragon1566]

"Its just a mechanic designed for a limited space" Thats what irritates me about learn/lessons, i really like the mechanic and want to play any of the cards in edh (rule 0 it, open information on lessons) but both ends just kind of...suck. I hope we get more support this year but its depressing how underwhelming most of the cards are outside of a very select few from standard.

[@danthewafflelord3059]

3:57 guess you could say WOTC wasn't very "adamant" about Adamant LMAO

[@jacksterII]

grandma shades

[@HPuzzleYT]

Ill get different ones one of these days, but they've been pretty improvised so my eyes can hold up to my lighting lol

[@shybandit521]

Im so annoyed they did this. There is so much capacity for this mechanic to be interesting, but they just underpowered every single card option for some reason. I wouldnt have even cared if they went for "theyre perfectly average cards that become OP if put in monocolor" they could have just been banned but the design space would still exist for future sets. They effectively vaulted the mechanic on purpose because they decided to make the cards underpowered and uncreative.

[@AnawnMouse]

Adamant is just woke prototype.

[@HPuzzleYT]

Wait a minute...two mana costs, one generic and more expensive, one cheaper with more pips... Is Prototype just prototype Adamant?

[@danthewafflelord3059]

It's reverse kicker