|
Fox of Stone posted:They are both appreciated cards in multiplayer and are uncommon. They're also cards that are worth a bunch of money and are at a power level that isn't equal to modern uncommon cards. You're nuts if you think they're going to reprint 70 dollar legacy staples at uncommon just because that was the original rarity in loving Alliances.
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 20:54 |
|
|
OssiansFolly posted:I HIGHLY doubt they will reprint TNN. It is kind of strong outside multiplayer formats (the ones it is allowed in). Reprinting it would drop the price on it, and the C13 packs though... I could easily see TNN in this set. It was designed with multiplayer in mind and makes perfect sense to have on a multiplayer draft format. It also gives people an incentive to buy packs outside of drafting since its legacy playable. Fox of Stone posted:They are both appreciated cards in multiplayer and are uncommon. The rarity it was first printed at means nothing. Sengir Vampire went from uncommon to rare and then back to uncommon. Force of Will is clearly at a rare power level. I'm highly skeptical of a reprint in this set and 100% sure that it wouldn't be uncommon if it was reprinted. Free Gratis fucked around with this message at 16:30 on Feb 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:24
|
|
|
The nice thing about Cogwork Librarian is that even if you never find anything to swap it back out with, you'll always end up playing a colorless hill giant. In most sets, a colorless 3/3 for 4 with an upside is typically uncommon.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:30
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:You're literally insane if you think this is going to happen. TNN in every multiplayer set forever would be pretty funny though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:33
|
|
|
Conspiracy seems cool as poo poo, I hope they'll be able to do it on MODO.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:33
|
|
|
Boxman posted:TNN in every multiplayer set forever would be pretty funny though. I was talking more about the Force/Wasteland reprints at uncommon.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
Oh look, more talk on the right and wrong ways to play Commander! The circular arguments in this thread are tightening into a spiral! Each time is closer and closer. ProTip: Don't post being a dick, unless you can handle being called a dick.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:They're also cards that are worth a bunch of money and are at a power level that isn't equal to modern uncommon cards. You're nuts if you think they're going to reprint 70 dollar legacy staples at uncommon just because that was the original rarity in loving Alliances. I could see it not being included due to power level differences - forgot about that. I don't see how it being $70 means anything. I have 9 so it's not a case of me wanting cheap ones. They were printed at uncommon. I think Serra angel and a couple other lesser uncommons have the dubious distinction of being upgraded to rare. I could see that too but I think they belong at uncommon. Multiplayer has enough "answer me or die" situations where a FOW is needed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
Fox of Stone posted:I could see that too but I think they belong at uncommon. There's no way in hell Force belongs at uncommon. I can't even fathom why you think this is a reasonable thing. Pay 1 life and exile a blue card from your hand to cast it for free is not an uncommon thing. Uncommon in 1996, when they still didn't really know what they were doing, is not the same thing as uncommon in 2014. edit Also Serra Angel is back to uncommon and has been for a few years now. BENGHAZI 2 fucked around with this message at 16:41 on Feb 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:39
|
|
|
The Nastier Nate posted:The nice thing about Cogwork Librarian is that even if you never find anything to swap it back out with, you'll always end up playing a colorless hill giant. In most sets, a colorless 3/3 for 4 with an upside is typically uncommon. I'm curious to see how people play him during draft. It immediately jumps out at me that acquiring one pack one means SIT ON IT and use him pick 1 on a subsequent pack when you can snag two powerful cards (ideal case is if you crack a rare and a foil rare that are both playable, for example). I think he'll almost always get swapped, though....how many times per draft do you have to agonize over choosing between two equally helpful cards, gambling on which one might table or show up in another pack?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:40
|
|
|
BaronVonVaderham posted:I'm curious to see how people play him during draft. It immediately jumps out at me that acquiring one pack one means SIT ON IT and use him pick 1 on a subsequent pack when you can snag two powerful cards (ideal case is if you crack a rare and a foil rare that are both playable, for example). I feel like Cogwork will be That One Card that always winds up being the remaining one in the pack, next to the land. But for completely different reasons than unplayable card approaches.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:43
|
|
|
Yeah nowadays they are going toward "fixing" rarities so it doesn't really matter what the original rarity was. Some things have gotten upgraded like Loxodon Warhammer, others downgraded like Take Possession. Some things have been turned into Mythics but I think those are generally in box sets, but it indicates their general attitude. I don't see them doing anything with Legacy in mind anyway but I do think Modern will become more fun as the format continues to develop and there is a reasonable amount of reprinting of staples (speaking as someone who theoretically has a large dollar value collection, I don't want excessive reprinting but would rather see it happen in Modern than Legacy to keep the value of those older cards higher while keeping at least one eternal format accessible).
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:44
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:There's no way in hell Force belongs at uncommon. I can't even fathom why you think this is a reasonable thing. Pay 1 life and exile a blue card from your hand to cast it for free is not an uncommon thing. Uncommon in 1996, when they still didn't really know what they were doing, is not the same thing as uncommon in 2014. Seriously, free counterspells at uncommon would warp the hell out of a limited format. Besides, Wizards is interested in reducing the price of staples, not crashing them. There's a multitude of factors that's keeping FoW at rare or higher. Wasteland could technically be an uncommon in a limited format like Theros since there's almost no targets for it to destroy, but once again it's a $100 card which they're not interested in crashing the price of.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:44
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:There's no way in hell Force belongs at uncommon. I can't even fathom why you think this is a reasonable thing. Pay 1 life and exile a blue card from your hand to cast it for free is not an uncommon thing. Uncommon in 1996, when they still didn't really know what they were doing, is not the same thing as uncommon in 2014. quote:Multiplayer has enough "answer me or die" situations where a FOW is needed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:45
|
|
|
Yeah Cogwork seems like an awesome pick up in pack 1, not worth it if it comes pack 3. So the number crunching has begun with the realization that this set follows a new scheme for distribution of cards, or this set only has about 60 new cards.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:45
|
|
|
Count Bleck posted:I feel like Cogwork will be That One Card that always winds up being the remaining one in the pack, next to the land. Eh, it's still a colorless Hill Giant. I can think of plenty of drafts where I was looking light on creatures and just wanted something even mildly playable.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:46
|
|
|
Fox of Stone posted:And yes I know Serra is back to uncommon where she belongs. Just like FOW and wasteland and strip mine for that matter. Why do you think Force would belong at uncommon if it was reprinted tomorrow, besides that was its original rarity (because original rarity means gently caress all, especially when talking about cards from 1996)? Forget about it being just straight up too good to be an uncommon in 2014, it would absolutely floor the price and WotC doesn't want to do that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:48
|
|
|
weird vanilla posted:Eh, it's still a colorless Hill Giant. I can think of plenty of drafts where I was looking light on creatures and just wanted something even mildly playable. I also eagerly await the guy who puts his Cogwork back in to take a playable and ANOTHER Cogwork 
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
Remember that Conspiracy is a Limited product not a Constructed one. Less of your answer me or die happening. I really don't think it matters though. If Conspiracy was meant to be like a normal set and be played in both formats, Force is still clearly a rare by modern standards. If the set really needed a good counterspell at uncommon then they'd create/use a good counterspell at uncommon. It wouldn't be Force.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:50
|
|
|
Bosushi! posted:I could easily see TNN in this set. It was designed with multiplayer in mind and makes perfect sense to have on a multiplayer draft format. It also gives people an incentive to buy packs outside of drafting since its legacy playable. Sets are designed 12-18 months before they go to retail if not more. They clearly didn't know that TNN was the hit card in c13 18 months ago and plan to reprint it barely months after its introduction. It isn't in Conspiracy, I guarantee it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:51
|
|
|
Count Bleck posted:I also eagerly await the guy who puts his Cogwork back in to take a playable and ANOTHER Cogwork ...I am at a loss of words on the logic in this...I am sure there are dumb enough people to do it...but why are they playing Magic?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:52
|
|
|
Count Bleck posted:I also eagerly await the guy who puts his Cogwork back in to take a playable and ANOTHER Cogwork  I sort of want a GP Conspiracy just to see how much of a clusterfuck it would be to cover it on camera.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:52
|
|
|
Putting back cogwork to take cogwork and FOIL cogwork
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:54
|
|
|
Count Bleck posted:Putting back cogwork to take cogwork and FOIL cogwork I put back all the Cogworks and take everything.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:55
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:Why do you think Force would belong at uncommon if it was reprinted tomorrow, besides that was its original rarity (because original rarity means gently caress all, especially when talking about cards from 1996)? quote:Multiplayer has enough "answer me or die" situations where a FOW (e: and wasteland) is needed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:56
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:I put back all the Cogworks and take everything.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:58
|
|
|
TUrns out this is actually not one of the criteria that goes into determining rarity, please try again.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 16:58
|
|
|
It's not inherit to multiplayer formats that something is so strong you need free counterspells to answer it. In eternal multiplayer formats, like commander, FOW is "necessary" for the same reason it is in Legacy, because there are busted-rear end cards in it. In a limited format where Wizards has 100% control over which 210 cards people can play it's not needed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 17:00
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:TUrns out this is actually not one of the criteria that goes into determining rarity, please try again.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 17:04
|
|
|
If they did a free spell they'd probably do the Pacts, but even then there's no need in a limited environment for that. Any reprints will be focused on either mana consistency improvements or fun funky multiplayer friendly cards. I do think the idea they reprint some filter lands or something akin is a possibility.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 17:05
|
|
|
En Fuego posted:Oh look, more talk on the right and wrong ways to play Commander! The correct way to play Commander (and Magic in general) has always been "with a group that wants to play it the same way you do" For the guy who hates playing Commander, he should probably just leave his decks at home or dismantle them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 17:06
|
|
|
Fox of Stone posted:Ah yes. I forgot they print counter spell and cancel at rare. Neither of those cards can be played without paying their mana cost by exiling a blue card from your hand and paying one life. Seriously, the "play without paying the mana cost" part is a huge loving deal that you're conveniently ignoring because you want it to be easily available. You seriously don't get how rarity works. Rosewater's written about it once or twice and he has a whole podcast devoted to it. You should read/listen to him, it's pretty interesting and educational. BENGHAZI 2 fucked around with this message at 17:10 on Feb 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 17:07
|
|
|
Fox of Stone posted:Ah yes. I forgot they print counter spell and cancel at rare. Both of those are less powerful and complex than FOW, it's clear that you don't understand how rarity works.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 17:09
|
|
|
If you want a direct comparison for ACC counterspells, both Thwart and Foil were uncommon. Of course, those are closer to Alliances than they are to the present day, chronologically ( ) and probably the most recent example, Disrupting Shoal, is rare despite the fact that it's pretty terrible. Misdirection is also rare, though its card text tends to be 'rare' a lot more often than "counter target spell" does (cf. Shunt, Redirect).Really the real answer is probably "it'd be justifiable to reprint it at either uncommon or rare and it just comes down to whether Wizards wants to be good or evil-but-less-evil-than-they'd-be-by-not-reprinting-at-all." e: MMA and TNN showed that overall supply is as much or more of a factor as the booster pack percentage. Rare would probably be fine as long as Wizards keeps the retailer throughput going strong. JerryLee fucked around with this message at 17:16 on Feb 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:"it'd be justifiable to reprint it at either uncommon Nobody has justified this besides saying that "it's needed".
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 17:12
|
|
|
This thread is all sorts of retarded today. Can we try to combine that "what rarity X card should be if reprinted" with "I wreaked furious vengeance on a lovely commander group by being a bigger baby instead of saying no until they shut the gently caress up." How about a tale where he beat them by cheating with a deck that had Talarand as a commander and 99 FoW's and they complained how it should never have been printed at uncommon because clearly he has 99 of them because they are an uncommon and gosh if he'd have just said no I don't want to play commander instead of wrecking their game they'd have been ok with it jeez you big jerk omg this is a run on sentence I have used to many caffeinee patches asd;flkasdfjasd;lkasjdf;asldkfjasdf................
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 17:13
|
|
|
Force of Will isn't nearly as good in limited as it is in Legacy/Vintage and wouldn't hurt the Conspiracy format itself if printed at uncommon. That said, there's no way that they'd flood the market by reprinting it as anything but a rare, and most likely it'd be a mythic. Wasteland makes even less sense as there aren't many non-basics in limited.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 17:13
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:Nobody has justified this besides saying that "it's needed". I tend to think that reprinting something at its former rarity is the default and doesn't have any sort of burden of proof attached to it. As I said, though, they can probably print it at rare and have the 'needed' effect on eternal formats as long as they ensure that your LGS's shelves remains stocked with shipments of the given product for a period of several months. If they decide to do it MMA style and test the waters then it probably wouldn't have any effect. JerryLee fucked around with this message at 17:21 on Feb 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 17:18
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:I tend to think that reprinting something at its former rarity is the default and doesn't have any sort of burden of proof attached to it. I guess they could print it as an uncommon, if they want to avoid making money.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 17:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 20:54 |
|
|
JerryLee posted:I tend to think that reprinting something at its former rarity is the default and doesn't have any sort of burden of proof attached to it. On the other hand, it's way too good for an uncommon and the default ruling would be scoffed at.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 17:24
|
|