Apologies for resurrecting such an old topic, but I'm currently designing a custom set and I wanted to know what the pushback on Tribal was all about -- from Wizards and from the community. At the moment, my set doesn't NEED Tribal to function, but there are things I could do if I use this card type.
I understand that Wizards' stance is that if they continued to use Tribal, they would feel the need to "go all in" and Tribal-ize as many cards as would make sense, otherwise, the use of Tribal would be inconsistent at best and confusing at worst. I get that.
But the reason I'm typing is because This topic stops on a kind of cliffhanger. I've been wondering why some posters have the idea that if Tribal were a supertype, then enchantment subtypes (for example) suddenly become creature types. This makes no sense to me.
I guess the first thing to understand is what a supertype even IS. The way I see it, a Card Supertype is the first authority on a card's properties. Basic means you can have any number of copies in your deck. Legendary means you can only have one on the battlefield with the same name, etc. A Card Type would be the second authority. Instants can be cast at (almost) any time, even when other spells and abilities are on the stack. Creatures can attack and block, etc. This leaves Card Subtypes, which are little more than labels to which other cards can refer (with a few exceptions). Supertypes inform Types and Types inform Subtypes. Not the other way around.
So why can't Tribal be a supertype meaning "This card is allowed to have one or more creature subtypes"? That doesn't seem to change anything from how it works now, or even how it's written on the card. The statement "This enchantment is a Goblin," is VERY different from "Enchantments can now be Goblins," or "All enchantments are Goblins." Trying to make the logic go both ways doesn't make any sense to me.
I also don't see an argument for Changeling-style creatures to suddenly become all creature types AND all noncreature types. Granting Bitterblossom Faerie-hood doesn't somehow make Mistform Ultimus a Shrine. Even if there were a card called Mage's Rage with the typeline: Tribal Sorcery -- Arcane Wizard, that doesn't add Arcane to the creature-type list. It adds the type Wizard to Mage's Rage without violating the subtype association rule, whether Tribal is a type with special rules or a supertype with special rules.
Finally, (you read all this?) I realize that the Type/Supertype debate is mostly cosmetic, but I feel like Wizards made this harder than it had to be. Oh,and as for the actual title of this topic, yeah. Tribal was a necessary evil, but one that was handled poorly and unfairly dismissed when it got too hard to support.
Thanks for your patience, and any further insight into why allowing Tribal to be a supertype would influence type/subtype associations. I'm willing to entertain the possibility that my interpretations of this situation are incorrect.
(As I write this, Ikoria, Lair of Behemoths has been fully 'spoiled', but hasn't yet been released and the Mutate mechanic is wreaking havoc on sensibilities, despite appearing to function in as straightforward a manner as such a nutty mechanic can. We'll see if Mutate fares any better than Tribal [apples and oranges, I know].)
I understand that Wizards' stance is that if they continued to use Tribal, they would feel the need to "go all in" and Tribal-ize as many cards as would make sense, otherwise, the use of Tribal would be inconsistent at best and confusing at worst. I get that.
But the reason I'm typing is because This topic stops on a kind of cliffhanger. I've been wondering why some posters have the idea that if Tribal were a supertype, then enchantment subtypes (for example) suddenly become creature types. This makes no sense to me.
I guess the first thing to understand is what a supertype even IS. The way I see it, a Card Supertype is the first authority on a card's properties. Basic means you can have any number of copies in your deck. Legendary means you can only have one on the battlefield with the same name, etc. A Card Type would be the second authority. Instants can be cast at (almost) any time, even when other spells and abilities are on the stack. Creatures can attack and block, etc. This leaves Card Subtypes, which are little more than labels to which other cards can refer (with a few exceptions). Supertypes inform Types and Types inform Subtypes. Not the other way around.
So why can't Tribal be a supertype meaning "This card is allowed to have one or more creature subtypes"? That doesn't seem to change anything from how it works now, or even how it's written on the card. The statement "This enchantment is a Goblin," is VERY different from "Enchantments can now be Goblins," or "All enchantments are Goblins." Trying to make the logic go both ways doesn't make any sense to me.
I also don't see an argument for Changeling-style creatures to suddenly become all creature types AND all noncreature types. Granting Bitterblossom Faerie-hood doesn't somehow make Mistform Ultimus a Shrine. Even if there were a card called Mage's Rage with the typeline: Tribal Sorcery -- Arcane Wizard, that doesn't add Arcane to the creature-type list. It adds the type Wizard to Mage's Rage without violating the subtype association rule, whether Tribal is a type with special rules or a supertype with special rules.
Finally, (you read all this?) I realize that the Type/Supertype debate is mostly cosmetic, but I feel like Wizards made this harder than it had to be. Oh,and as for the actual title of this topic, yeah. Tribal was a necessary evil, but one that was handled poorly and unfairly dismissed when it got too hard to support.
Thanks for your patience, and any further insight into why allowing Tribal to be a supertype would influence type/subtype associations. I'm willing to entertain the possibility that my interpretations of this situation are incorrect.
(As I write this, Ikoria, Lair of Behemoths has been fully 'spoiled', but hasn't yet been released and the Mutate mechanic is wreaking havoc on sensibilities, despite appearing to function in as straightforward a manner as such a nutty mechanic can. We'll see if Mutate fares any better than Tribal [apples and oranges, I know].)