Home » Cruise » Magic Cruise 2010 Talk - Nagle’s Worldwake Design Seminar

Magic Cruise 2010 Talk - Nagle’s Worldwake Design Seminar

In this seminar we watch Ken Nagle, head designer for Worldwake, discuss how he came to be that designer, how many cards ended up, questions from the audience, and more. Support the Show! Buy a playmat! bit.ly Sign up for the next cruise in February 2011! legionevents.com

Tags: Cruise, Seminar, ken nagle, 2010, Magic, Worldwake, Design, Nagle's

Related posts:

  1. Magic Cruise 2010 Talk - Patrick Chapin on Worldwake
  2. The Magic Show #131 - 2009 Magic Cruise
  3. The Disney Magic Cruise Ship
  4. Jorge Cruise and Dr. Oz talk about Sugar
  5. Diane Von Furstenberg Cruise 2010 Fashion Show

25 Comments

@C603032

Too small for you?


Yeah, and an 8/7 sphinx? Guess who.


I love his talk about Wrexial, the Risen Deep.

“Yes, I can make you a kraken Doug Beyer”

“Cause you were a jerk and put it in your deck.”


Wait till you meet him in a boss battle though, very hard to beat and regenerates mana constantly.

Oh…the other kind of boss…


Man Mr Nagle is my kind of guy


Sorry for bitching, I just really hated the set.


I retract the jace comment


And of course a green guy made the broken mana graber green fucker.

doin fucking action too…


So, you had to steal the other guys man lands, whine about his set for the first 4 muinets, oh AND multikicker? (witch lets face it is X on crack, a lobotomized monkey could have come up with it)

Ah and you stole COMMET STORM!!! thats you goddam pre-releese, that is just lame.

And the thing you DID make is the blandest planeswalker in the history of the universe.”Duh… lets make ‘im mill da hole dek!! hurhur.”


OK? OK? OK?


He seems like he would be a nice boss. :) I think i know who printed a certain 4/5 fatty for 3 mana XD.


Red’s not supposed to get Brute Force anymore.
Although I guess all the Zendikar ETBT spell lands have an effect that it roughly worth 1/2 a mana and probably 1/2 a card (or less), while Teetering Peaks is worth an entire card (so Bull Rush might have to be a Brute Force by comparison) so it’s unclear.

It’s exactly 1/2 of a Fists of the Anvil and eats as much life as a shock and lets your 2 drops eat Turtles. Not quite card parity, and probably the strongest red should get considering limited.


Quest For The Unbreakable Alliance 1W

Whenever an ally enters the battle field under your control, put a quest counter on Quest For The Unbreakable Alliance. At the beggining of your upkeep if Quest For The Unbreakable Alliance has 5 or more Quest counters on it, put a 1/1 white soldier ally creature token onto the battlefield.

See now isn’t that easy Ken? Anyways although he will never read this. Great job on worldwake.


38:15… I am OVERJOYED with Abyssal Persecutor… THAT is my kind of card!


His name needs to change from “i always liked the fatties” to ken “ok” nagle. He uses “ok” like others use “umm”.


This video’s great, I’ve watched all the Cruise Coverage, great job Evan


I’m surprised nobody said something along the lines of
“So… Bull Rush… What happened there?”


really liked this video…used to be on the fence about ken, kinda weird/shy guy not sure how to take him, but after watching this, I have a whole new respect and appreciation for him and the people who are behind making magic exactly what I enjoy doing so much. Thanks Evan and props to Ken for being an all around cool dude.


It is nice to know Ken is really dedicated to the game.


I would like to ask ken: ” what is the future view as a designer, of the tendence of cheap cards with the passing of time, for example, any slower “lighting bolt” card will be hated? can you really control the cost curve of magic cards over the years? there is always a better card for a cheaper cost, is this going to kill magic in afew years? like in 5 years magic duels are going to last 4 turns?.


Thank you, Evan, for recording this for those of us who didn’t attend the cruise.


@Darklordbrink You are correct. it is Vector/Directional and multivariable in Calc 3. Calc 4 is differential equation.


I had it backwards. Calc 3 was vector and multivariable, and Calc 4 was DE


In my undergrad, Calc 3 was DE, Calc 4 was vector cal.


I thought Calc 4 was Differential Equations. Either way, it really does explain a lot


Want To Provide Some Feedback?