|
En Fuego posted:Is Brainstorm the new Explore? Brainstorm is the old Explore. People noted Bertoncini drawing four off Brainstorm before his cheating really became widely known.
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 20:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 12:11 |
|
|
OFF WITH HIS
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 20:45
|
|
|
So I forgot that the prerelease events for MTGO ended last night and still have one of those destiny packs I forgot to use in another tournament. Is it just dead weight in my collection now?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 20:49
|
|
|
TheLoser posted:So I forgot that the prerelease events for MTGO ended last night and still have one of those destiny packs I forgot to use in another tournament. Is it just dead weight in my collection now? If you send in a ticket this week you can get it refunded iirc.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
En Fuego posted:Drama! Cheating? Honest mistake? This is ... Mana Burned. I am your host. It's a pretty clear cheat to me, might have been accidental but it's definitely a Drawing Extra Cards penalty.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
AATREK CURES KIDS posted:It's a pretty clear cheat to me, might have been accidental but it's definitely a Drawing Extra Cards penalty. It's not drawing extra cards, it's a game rule violation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 20:56
|
|
|
What a Judas posted:It's not drawing extra cards, it's a game rule violation. That's the one that ends in execution, right?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 21:00
|
|
|
That guy didn't draw extra cards he just failed to put back enough cards for Brainstorm. Its a completely different error and penalty and also a super easy mistake to make in the finals of a massive Magic tournament.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 21:08
|
|
|
Stinky Pit posted:That guy didn't draw extra cards he just failed to put back enough cards for Brainstorm. Its a completely different error and penalty and also a super easy mistake to make in the finals of a massive Magic tournament. Uh no its not. I can't imagine how you misresolve brainstorm like that
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
Stinky Pit posted:That guy didn't draw extra cards he just failed to put back enough cards for Brainstorm. Its a completely different error and penalty and also a super easy mistake to make in the finals of a massive Magic tournament. It's not like he had at least 10+ rounds of practise resolving Brainstorm prior to that moment...
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 21:20
|
|
|
Sampatrick posted:Uh no its not. I can't imagine how you misresolve brainstorm like that It was after some absurd amount of rounds of Swiss, there is room for legitimate fatigue being the explanation, but it's still fishy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 21:20
|
|
|
Sampatrick posted:Uh no its not. I can't imagine how you misresolve brainstorm like that He put one card back when the resolution of Brainstorm calls for 2, that's a whole different violation than drawing extra cards. If your argument is that the mistake is "eerily in his favor" then you've got no idea. I'm not even an experienced Judge but the kind of play errors I've seen players make are crazy. Both in their favor and not, I've seen guys draw 3 off Brainstorm and just immediately go "OH poo poo" and call the Judge on themselves a turn later. People gently caress up all the time. We can't write rules that punish every mistake as if it was a cheat, and we can't arbitrate errors differently whether they benefit the player or depending on the board state or any other conditions. Or rather we could, but the DCI decided its not in the interest of the game. DurdleDuck posted:It's not like he had at least 10+ rounds of practise resolving Brainstorm prior to that moment... It's cool that you're a perfect Magic player at all times. I however, like I imagine most people, gently caress up poo poo all the time, I've made all kinds of mistakes at tournaments, I've attacked with creatures when they had summoning sickness, I've scrye'd 3 cards instead of 2 on Preordain, I've played spells I didn't have the mana for. Mistakes happen. If the internet had hours of footage of me playing Magic, they could make a convincing case for me being a gigantic cheater. Ciprian Maricon fucked around with this message at 21:52 on Feb 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
Stinky Pit posted:He put one card back when the resolution of Brainstorm calls for 2, that's a whole different violation than drawing extra cards. I believe the "no it's not" was in reference to it being an easy mistake to make. kirtar fucked around with this message at 03:38 on Feb 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 21:36
|
|
|
so what's the best way to turn this Brimaz I opened into thoughtseizes or desecration demons for my mono-black devotion deck? I have yet to trade cards w/ anyone but friends at the local gaming shop or online. Wondering what I should be trying to get for Brimaz in trade?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 21:42
|
|
|
MMD3 posted:so what's the best way to turn this Brimaz I opened into thoughtseizes or desecration demons for my mono-black devotion deck? Take it to this thread and either sell it and buy the cards you want or see if someone wants to trade black cards for it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 21:47
|
|
|
ScarletBrother posted:Take it to this thread and either sell it and buy the cards you want or see if someone wants to trade black cards for it. aha! thanks
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
MMD3 posted:so what's the best way to turn this Brimaz I opened into thoughtseizes or desecration demons for my mono-black devotion deck? I sold a playset of Brimaz and 10 tokens for $162 on ebay this weekend. Seems like a great deal considering the TCG going rate.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 22:23
|
|
|
Stinky Pit posted:He put one card back when the resolution of Brainstorm calls for 2, that's a whole different violation than drawing extra cards. Except that, presumably, you didn't do all that in the Top 8 of such a big tournament, and didn't end up winning said tournament. On the kitchen table (or even FNM-level) we've all done mistakes (I've personally counted damage from Marath's activated ability as commander damage for example), but at Competitive and Professional REL, errors are under much more scrutiny. I think that it was probably an honest mistake (although one of them SHOULD have called a judge, and his opponent should have paid a bit more attention), but considering how Brainstorm is a card that he both has played a lot and has seen being played a lot, it does seem a bit fishy. He did end up winning the tournament, which makes it just a touch fishier. Just my personal opinion.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 22:32
|
|
|
His opponent missed it, the Judges missed it, the coverage team missed it. The only thing we can do now is move on. It's a shame he didn't get the appropriate penalty for violating the rules but we don't do that retroactively for many reasons. The only thing to take away from this is to remember how easily, you, your opponent, the Judges, literally everyone can miss something. Stay calm and rested and play as well as you can and do your best to watch your opponent because even an honest player can make a mistake and cost you the game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 22:40
|
|
|
CountFosco posted:Not really, because they could very easily not reprint fetches in a return to zendikar block. I don't think they want fetches in standard ever again, really. Theey don't want fetches in standard with shocks, but fetches aren't inherently busted and it's the only way to bring the Onslaught ones into Modern, which Maro has said they want to do.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 23:09
|
|
|
I'm still holding out hope for fetch+shock M15 super-standard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 23:18
|
|
|
Jabor posted:I'm still holding out hope for fetch+shock M15 super-standard. This is incredibly delusional for a couple of reasons, the biggest one besides the obvious manabase poo poo is that it'd be a ten card cycle of lands in a core set.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:This is incredibly delusional for a couple of reasons, the biggest one besides the obvious manabase poo poo is that it'd be a ten card cycle of lands in a core set. But they're not obligated to print Onslaught and Zendikar fetches at the same time, are they?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
ScarletBrother posted:But they're not obligated to print Onslaught and Zendikar fetches at the same time, are they? Someone (at WotC) said they don't want to split up "friendly" and "enemy" colored lands between coreset/expansion (like the checklands in Innistrad and M12-M13), so mana is gonna more like RtR and Theros, with 10 lands split up 4-3-3 going forward. This means core sets will have even less worthwhile cards, as their lands will be "a lovely common fixer (Terramorphic Expanse or Uncharted Shores)", "a lovely uncommon hoser (Encroaching Wastes)" and "a rare of dubious quality (Mutavault this year, but maybe something like Reliquary Tower in the future)
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 23:36
|
|
|
Finish the worldwake cycle of manlands with enemy colors please, wizards.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 23:46
|
|
|
ScarletBrother posted:But they're not obligated to print Onslaught and Zendikar fetches at the same time, are they? They're not obligated, no, but they've said that going forward they want their dual lands to both a) not favor specific color pairings and b) all go within the expert expansions. So if they DID reprint the fetches, they'd reprint all ten, and they'd do it in a block rather than a core set.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 23:47
|
|
|
They could also put a theoretically playable prismatic land or two in the core set, like City of Brass, Grand Coliseum, or Gemstone Mine, or I guess more likely a new land entirely designed to appeal to infants who will shy away from harsh and punishing mechanics like "take a point of damage" or "a limited number of uses." Or maybe Reflecting Pool, that wouldn't be a bad core set staple. I mean, I already think that manabases are way too permissive but that ship ain't coming back to the harbor anytime soon so we might as well go full  with manabases and incentivize color discipline in other ways. Like with Devotion. Which is awesome.edit: Speaking of Unknown Shores, one trend I'd love to see the brakes thrown on is functional reprints with different names in places where there was no actual need to reflavor them (I'm sure Theros has grottoes). JerryLee fucked around with this message at 23:52 on Feb 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:They could also put a theoretically playable prismatic land or two in the core set, like City of Brass, Grand Coliseum, or Gemstone Mine, or I guess more likely a new land entirely designed to appeal to infants who will shy away from harsh and punishing mechanics like "take a point of damage" or "a limited number of uses." Or maybe Reflecting Pool, that wouldn't be a bad core set staple. Yeah why would they put cards that are easily grokkable in the set that is most aimed at new players? Clearly just pandering to retarded babies. "Life is just another resource" is seriously one of the hardest concepts to wrap your head around as a new player. BENGHAZI 2 fucked around with this message at 00:14 on Feb 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 00:10
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:"Life is just another resource" is seriously one of the hardest concepts to wrap your head around as a new player. Don't they sometimes do black intro decks built around the idea from time to time? "X is just another resource" is one of the main characteristics of the colour.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 00:36
|
|
|
BizarroAzrael posted:Don't they sometimes do black intro decks built around the idea from time to time? "X is just another resource" is one of the main characteristics of the colour. That doesn't make it not reallllly hard to wrap your mind around when one of the first things you learn about the game, if not the first, is that the first player to lose all their life loses, which means losing life is bad, why would I want to lose life on purpose?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 00:40
|
|
|
I personally don't understand why Wizards is so protective of the secondary market. The could easily sell a "Modern Power Pack" with 10 of the most expensive cards in the format for $200, and almost all of that will be profit for Wizards. Since the whole point is for them to make money, why would they turn away from this obvious source of revenue? I doubt it would anger game stores that much, sure the prices on those particular singles will take a hit, but they get a cut of each $200 sale which should make up for it. It would anger the speculators, but that's a tiny fraction of the community, while keeping the prices of tournament quality decks from going out of control will do a lot for the health of the game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 00:51
|
|
|
Konstantin posted:I doubt it would anger game stores that much, sure the prices on those particular singles will take a hit, but they get a cut of each $200 sale which should make up for it. I'm sure having that 200 dollar card that you paid 100 for (making up numbers) suddenly plummet in value and then also not sell wouldn't piss anyone off at all. Part of the reason people are willing to pay money for singles is because they retain value to whatever extent, and WotC showing a willingness to just reprint poo poo en masse to crater prices would kill that dead in a heartbeat.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
Konstantin posted:I personally don't understand why Wizards is so protective of the secondary market. The could easily sell a "Modern Power Pack" with 10 of the most expensive cards in the format for $200, and almost all of that will be profit for Wizards. Since the whole point is for them to make money, why would they turn away from this obvious source of revenue? I doubt it would anger game stores that much, sure the prices on those particular singles will take a hit, but they get a cut of each $200 sale which should make up for it. It would anger the speculators, but that's a tiny fraction of the community, while keeping the prices of tournament quality decks from going out of control will do a lot for the health of the game. Short term gain vs. long term. Right now the game has a lot of fame and mystique surrounding famous power cards. I feel like MTG hits the news every few months when someone buys a Mox for some ludicrous amount, and why would they want to distill that long-term free publicity?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:That doesn't make it not reallllly hard to wrap your mind around when one of the first things you learn about the game, if not the first, is that the first player to lose all their life loses, which means losing life is bad, why would I want to lose life on purpose? I'm sure that some kid in 1993 always pointed his Ancestral Recall at his opponent because he didn't want to run out of cards.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 00:56
|
|
|
Konstantin posted:I personally don't understand why Wizards is so protective of the secondary market. The could easily sell a "Modern Power Pack" with 10 of the most expensive cards in the format for $200, and almost all of that will be profit for Wizards. Since the whole point is for them to make money, why would they turn away from this obvious source of revenue? I doubt it would anger game stores that much, sure the prices on those particular singles will take a hit, but they get a cut of each $200 sale which should make up for it. It would anger the speculators, but that's a tiny fraction of the community, while keeping the prices of tournament quality decks from going out of control will do a lot for the health of the game. Because they could put those same 10 cards spread amongst a few boxes of Modern Masters 2 and make a whole lot more. Also no-one wants Chronicles II: Reprint Boogaloo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 00:56
|
|
|
Because, you me, everyone posting here, and the kind of person who would want a "Modern Power Pack" let alone knows what Modern is, represents a tiny portion of their customer base and they are far more interested in printing a new set of booster packs or multiplayer product that sells much better to the vast majority of their customer base.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 00:57
|
|
|
They won't do that because of the same shadowy cabal that keeps the Reserved List in place by holding Maro's lost Roseanne scripts hostage. But yes, all but a tiny fraction of people who are into Magic would like that to happen.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 01:02
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:Yeah why would they put cards that are easily grokkable in the set that is most aimed at new players? Clearly just pandering to retarded babies. I don't know, it seemed pretty obvious to me the first time someone spelled it out. I mean, I was sceptical at first, but it made a lot of sense to me, and it helped that every internet resource seemed to agree that some of the most broken cards in Magic history were the ones that allowed you to spend life on other things. Then there was the fact that two mana would kill one creature (terror), give you one land (rampant growth), draw maybe 1.5 cards (accumulated knowledge), or gain you 7 life (hero's reunion). The cards themselves think life is worth less than practically anything else in the game. Jabor posted:Also no-one wants Chronicles II: Reprint Boogaloo. 
Ragnar34 fucked around with this message at 01:04 on Feb 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 01:02
|
|
|
Ragnar34 posted:I don't know, it seemed pretty obvious to me the first time someone spelled it out. I mean, I was sceptical at first, but it made a lot of sense to me, and it helped that every internet resource seemed to agree that some of the most broken cards in Magic history were the ones that allowed you to spend life on other things. Then there was the fact that two mana would kill one creature (terror), give you one land (rampant growth), draw maybe 1.5 cards (accumulated knowledge), or gain you 7 life (hero's reunion). The cards themselves think life is worth less than practically anything else in the game. It's more that it's hard to get down to the concept of that Magic is a (relatively) short game where short term ideas pay off in victory. Most games that have similar tropes to Magic (like RPGs, strategy games, really anything in general) emphasize the idea of keeping your team in one piece, staying very much alive, etc. Getting into Innistrad as a newbie was really difficult because I hated the concept of losing creatures since in everything I had played before that, losing a person never had "There's an advantage too if you do it right" attached to it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 01:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 12:11 |
|
|
C-Euro posted:They won't do that because of the same shadowy cabal that keeps the Reserved List in place by holding Maro's lost Roseanne scripts hostage. But yes, all but a tiny fraction of people who are into Magic would like that to happen. I actually do not want that to happen and I am not a speculator. Ragnar34 posted:I don't know, it seemed pretty obvious to me the first time someone spelled it out. I mean, I was sceptical at first Thank you for making my point: It's an idea that's counterintuitive the first time you hear it. Yes, it makes sense once you think about it and read about it, but it's not an obvious, immediate idea.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 01:09
|
|