|
Zoness posted:Yeah but I mean, there's speculation and there's suggesting "Let's give one of the players a card that was banned from Standard and Extended at some point". Don't forget Restricted right now in Vintage. But, yeah, sorry I poo poo on your special snowflake ideas because they were dumb. Feel free to keep dovetailing onto the end of a couple of pages of really terrible armchair designers who make terrible points about a game they clearly and demonstrably do not understand on a fundamental level by trying to shoehorn completely unrealistic ideas into this game. I wouldn't want to stifle your creative process with logic or reason.
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 21:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 18:23 |
|
|
Toshimo posted:Don't forget Restricted right now in Vintage. But, yeah, sorry I poo poo on your special snowflake ideas because they were dumb. Feel free to keep dovetailing onto the end of a couple of pages of really terrible armchair designers who make terrible points about a game they clearly and demonstrably do not understand on a fundamental level by trying to shoehorn completely unrealistic ideas into this game. I wouldn't want to stifle your creative process with logic or reason. Great, I agree with you its a dumb idea, but seriously, you should explain why its a dumb idea rather than just say it is. It keeps the conversation going and helps inform other posters.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 21:37
|
|
|
Right, now that, but also you don't start down 2 cards.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 21:40
|
|
|
Is it really necessary to explain why free resources in magic is a bad idea?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
On the subject of other Games, what do people in this thread think of Solforge? I know we have an "other CCGs" thread, but I'm specifically curious what Magic players think of the game. And it's sorta related, since Garfield was involved in its design.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
MrBling posted:Is it really necessary to explain why free resources in magic is a bad idea? Not if you are good at the game, but we have lots of noobs and casuals in this thread and more than one lurker, and I'd rather they learn something rather than be chased out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 21:45
|
|
|
MrBling posted:Is it really necessary to explain why free resources in magic is a bad idea? It's much easier to say "in Magic at least, the free mana would be much more powerful as curving out isn't guaranteed, while in Hearthstone your mana sources are a guaranteed progression" That's literally less words than he spent in either post being really upset about someone's (admittedly dumb) idea for Magic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 21:47
|
|
|
Boxman posted:On the subject of other Games, what do people in this thread think of Solforge? I know we have an "other CCGs" thread, but I'm specifically curious what Magic players think of the game. And it's sorta related, since Garfield was involved in its design. Solforge is an amazingly awful game full of poor design decisions and is a blatant money grab that has not only failed to deliver on its kickstarter promises, but also muddied the waters by making cards untradable if you acquire them in "the wrong way". There's a lot of discussion on these issues in the Solforge thread and a lot of people are very bitter. From launch, to this day, the most effective way to acquire new cards is to make bots play each other in your stead with horribly lopsided decks. That's a damning indictment on its own. There's a litany of other issues, but even on that alone, it's hardly worth investing in compared to MODO, Hearthstone, Might and Magic, or just plain punching yourself in the crotch.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 21:47
|
|
|
How the hell have I never heard of the VS CCG? I don't think I have even ever seen it in a gaming store, and I have seen unopended Garbage Pail kids cards sitting next to uncracked X-Files stuff in the last week 
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
Free Lotus Petal is stupid in Magic because there are tons of ways to turn 2 mana on turn 1 into a T1 win. Free Lotus Petal is fine in Hearthstone because the best thing you can do with it is "Land, Petal, White Knight, go." If you agreed to play 100 fair decks full of nothing but creatures and removal, Magic would handle it fine, too. Evidence: People don't run petal in Legacy Jund/BUG/etc.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 21:53
|
|
|
I think all really stupid idiot ideas should be discussed fully and to my liking.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 21:54
|
|
|
MrBling posted:Is it really necessary to explain why free resources in magic is a bad idea? Back in the day the instructions bundled with starter decks had a small footnote about "house rules" that encouraged wacky rear end ideas if everyone agreed on them iirc. I believe "drop all lands in your opening hand" and "free mulligan for an all land/no land hand" were things we tried and in the case of the mulligan rule, kept when playing at the lunchroom table (before they banned the cards for Satan/gambling reasons). It totally changes the way decks are made/played and turns the game six kinds of crazy but it was an interesting thought experiment in 1994-5 with the cards we had available. Now I think everything is too fine tuned for that kind of thing because it can be massively exploited and runs screaming out of the realm of "kitchen table fun" all the way into "rules lawyer fuckery" before "fair" could even get it's boots on. Grandpa Dirge: postn' itt
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
Huxley posted:Free Lotus Petal is stupid in Magic because there are tons of ways to turn 2 mana on turn 1 into a T1 win. Don't forget how having both an extra artifact and 0 CMC spell would affect things like Affinity/Storm/Metalcraft (for those unaware, the Hearthstone Lotus Petal has these interactions too). It would also invalidate Manaless dredge as a deck. I could have written pages upon pages about why this would lead to the player on the draw winning 80%+ of the time, but instead I just summed it up by pointing out that you can't just throw random rules changes at a balanced game without breaking it. Which is simultaneously true, obvious, and the only argument that needs be made. But that sort of got ignored. Somehow.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:Don't forget how having both an extra artifact and 0 CMC spell would affect things like Affinity/Storm/Metalcraft (for those unaware, the Hearthstone Lotus Petal has these interactions too). It would also invalidate Manaless dredge as a deck. I could have written pages upon pages about why this would lead to the player on the draw winning 80%+ of the time, but instead I just summed it up by pointing out that you can't just throw random rules changes at a balanced game without breaking it. Which is simultaneously true, obvious, and the only argument that needs be made. But that sort of got ignored. Somehow. Right. Hearthstone is fine because there aren't ways to abuse it beyond reason (by design, Rogue gets a little better of it than anyone else, but their mechanic has also been balanced around that fact). Magic would be fine if you agreed to play in a way that didn't abuse it. But that version of Magic kind of sucks, which makes it a bad idea. We are saying the exact same thing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
Huxley posted:Free Lotus Petal is stupid in Magic because there are tons of ways to turn 2 mana on turn 1 into a T1 win. The problem with The Coin in Hearthstone right now is that it counts as a spell, which activates a lot of cards and turns on all Rogue combo cards. I think if The Coin wasn't a spell the first turn advantage would be even more oppressive but the fact that only a select number of classes can really press it's advantage is an issue. It's like the difference between Lotus Petal and Simian Spirit Guide.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:you can't just throw random rules changes at a balanced game without breaking it. Which is simultaneously true, obvious, and the only argument that needs be made. You're right but you could have posted that half sentence instead of getting vitriolic. Not a single person is disagreeing with you, and if anything I think we should stop this discussion in its tracks to figure out who exactly pissed in your cheerios this morning.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 22:05
|
|
|
Death Bot posted:You're right but you could have posted that half sentence instead of getting vitriolic. Not a single person is disagreeing with you, and if anything I think we should stop this discussion in its tracks to figure out who exactly pissed in your cheerios this morning. Brownhat did.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 22:07
|
|
|
Around M15's release, I wanna see if my LGS will run a super-standard sealed event. Does that sound like a fun thing or just overwhelming?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 22:20
|
|
|
forbidden lesbian posted:Someone's been playing for a while. I've actually only been playing for a few months, picking up a bit after Theros came out; before that, I'd played from Fifth Dawn to Saviors of Kamigawa. Grognards have been teaching me how to play, so, essentially the same thing as playing for a while.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 22:27
|
|
|
They do it as 2HG at SCG events sometimes. Might be fun. Something in the trade thread made me think to finally ask this. Who has the best rates on bulk commons/uncommons? I have a stack of 4 and 5 column boxes that's literally taller than I am full of stuff back to Revised that I need to get rid of. No Lotus Petals, though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 22:27
|
|
|
Sorry for the threadjack, as someone who hasn't seen Lotus Petal except as an extremely niche legacy card in the most degenerate of combo decks, I had no idea it would be so powerful in standard/limited, but I'll take your guys' word for it. Also, super standard sealed has been tried before, the issue is that the cards in a particular block are designed to work together in a particular limited environment. Things like Populate or Heroic are nearly useless if you don't have the cards that make them good, and there are a lot less of those cards if you're opening multiple blocks in the same sealed deck format.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 22:28
|
|
|
redstormpopcorn posted:Around M15's release, I wanna see if my LGS will run a super-standard sealed event. Does that sound like a fun thing or just overwhelming? If you mean more than six packs, it's definitely fun, but people need a bit more deck building time to sort through all the cards. There have been special modo events where they've done more than six packs of sealed and that is the biggest lesson that the community has learned.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 22:30
|
|
|
The inconsistency is the big thing. I've tried a few of the weird MODO sealeds and every pool I've gotten has been completely unsynergistic garbage.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 23:05
|
|
|
First Bass posted:I've actually only been playing for a few months, picking up a bit after Theros came out; before that, I'd played from Fifth Dawn to Saviors of Kamigawa. Grognards have been teaching me how to play, so, essentially the same thing as playing for a while. Oh haha, I just assumed because you said interrupt speed. I don't think that terminology has been used in years.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 23:13
|
|
|
Konstantin posted:Sorry for the threadjack, as someone who hasn't seen Lotus Petal except as an extremely niche legacy card in the most degenerate of combo decks, I had no idea it would be so powerful in standard/limited, but I'll take your guys' word for it. Also, super standard sealed has been tried before, the issue is that the cards in a particular block are designed to work together in a particular limited environment. Things like Populate or Heroic are nearly useless if you don't have the cards that make them good, and there are a lot less of those cards if you're opening multiple blocks in the same sealed deck format. Lotus Petal, as a card, would be totally fine in Standard (Modern, not so much). You're trading a card for a one-off mana boost, which is a reasonable trade. Giving it as a freebie to the second player is very different. Perhaps if you also made it so that both/neither player skips their first draw, and gave the second player a lotus petal variant that produced colourless mana and didn't count as a spell, it would be better. The general idea of giving the second player a temporary resource to compensate for their tempo disadvantage is potentially workable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
Jabor posted:Lotus Petal, as a card, would be totally fine in Standard (Modern, not so much). You're trading a card for a one-off mana boost, which is a reasonable trade. For the record, Hearthstone doesn't have colored mana or anything. So, again, no matter what, you'll be able to play a card that costs X on the Xth turn (or sooner if you're a Druid or use the Coin). The color pie is a very big part of Magic, and Magic's success I believe. Hearthstone's equivalent are class-only spells, I think? Not an expert.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 00:11
|
|
|
Serperoth posted:The color pie is a very big part of Magic, and Magic's success I believe. Hearthstone's equivalent are class-only spells, I think? Not an expert. This is correct, each class has a relatively small amount of creatures and spells that only they can use, and there's a large amount of creatures open to everyone (though some classes can use some of them better than others).
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 01:14
|
|
|
Question about Aetherling: I can activate his abilities literally any time I want correct? For example: I declare attackers, opponent declares blockers, I pay the 1 mana and make him unblockable. Or: My opponent casts a Lightning Strike, I don't respond, opponent casts a shock to finish him off and I pay the 1 mana and exile Aetherling. Both of these situations are OK correct? e: "lighting bolt" isn't a card. durr morning wood fucked around with this message at 01:52 on Mar 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 01:48
|
|
|
morning wood posted:Question about Aetherling: I can activate his abilities literally any time I want correct? For example: I declare attackers, opponent declares blockers, I pay the 1 mana and make him unblockable. Or: My opponent casts a Lightning Bolt, I don't respond, opponent casts a shock to finish him off and I pay the 1 mana and exile Aetherling. Both of these situations are OK correct? The first situation doesn't work. Once a blocker is declared Aetherling will be considered blocked. You need activate the Unblockable ability prior to your declare attackers phase for it to matter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 01:51
|
|
|
Yes, but if your opponent has already declared a blocker, making him unblockable does nothing. Activated abilities (abilities that have a cost : effect) are always usable at anytime you could otherwise use an instant, which is anytime yo have priority unless the ability or another effect says different.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 01:52
|
|
|
morning wood posted:Question about Aetherling: I can activate his abilities literally any time I want correct? For example: I declare attackers, opponent declares blockers, I pay the 1 mana and make him unblockable. Or: My opponent casts a Lightning Bolt, I don't respond, opponent casts a shock to finish him off and I pay the 1 mana and exile Aetherling. Both of these situations are OK correct? Nope! You have to make him unblockable before the declare blockers step. Once you move past declare attackers, your opponent can block him and it is to late. Combat Phase active player has priority non-active player has priority both pass Declare Attackers - Aetherling attacks Active Player has priority - make him unblockable non-active player has priority Declare Blockers - CAN'T BLOCK OH NOES! 2nd scenario bolt, then shock on the stack, yes you can respond by activating him to exile before shock resolves.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 01:53
|
|
|
threefive posted:The first situation doesn't work. Once a blocker is declared Aetherling will be considered blocked. You need activate the Unblockable ability prior to your declare attackers phase for it to matter. To be pedantic, you can activate it after blockers, it just will be irrelevant except for soaking one mana pointlessly. Also, re: the "literally any time I want" wording, it's technically "any time I have priority." I mention this because in my experience, people who learned the game in an informal or ad hoc fashion can have the idea that you are allowed to respond to literally anything your opponent does, leading to exchanges like the following:  "I activate my Waterfront Bouncer..." "I counter the ability by tapping down your bouncer after you've decided to activate it, but before you can pay the cost!"Paraphrased from an actual exchange I had circa 2000 or so. To be fair, there was a point before then when I tried to do a similar thing with Ring of Gix to keep my brother from ever activating his Jester's Cap. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 01:56
|
|
|
Thanks for the responses this makes sense now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 01:56
|
|
|
If I want to attack with a man land, can I leave activating it until declare attackers, or does it need to be a creature before combat? Would there be a window for it to be hit by a spell before it's declared as an attacker?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 02:19
|
|
|
BizarroAzrael posted:If I want to attack with a man land, can I leave activating it until declare attackers, or does it need to be a creature before combat? Would there be a window for it to be hit by a spell before it's declared as an attacker? It needs to be activated before the appropriate step, and yes there's a window for your opponent to do something about it in between activating it and declaring it as an attacker.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 02:25
|
|
|
morning wood posted:e: "lighting bolt" isn't a card. durr Haha, this is sorta awesome. I don't mean to make fun, but it's actually one of the most iconic burn spells. It'll come back again, some day. BizarroAzrael posted:If I want to attack with a man land, can I leave activating it until declare attackers, or does it need to be a creature before combat? Would there be a window for it to be hit by a spell before it's declared as an attacker? The last opportunity for you to animate something would be in the start of combat step (I think that's what it's technically called). And after you do it and pass priority, your opponent would have the opportunity to kill it at instant speed. EDIT: Limited Resouces somewhat recently did an episode called technical play that goes into detail about priority and what-have-you. It helped me understand how exactly things happen inside combat. The exact specifics of that phase aren't at all clear intuitively or from a casual reading of the rules, and I find it's a good listen. Alternately, MODO enforces very technical play. If you don't want to install it (or can't- I have a mac), just watching streams of players online can be pretty helpful. Boxman fucked around with this message at 02:31 on Mar 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 02:26
|
|
|
Boxman posted:Haha, this is sorta awesome. Oh nice I wouldn't complain if that one got reprinted. Needless to say I'm an uber noob and only play standard 
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 02:31
|
|
|
morning wood posted:Oh nice I wouldn't complain if that one got reprinted. Needless to say I'm an uber noob and only play standard I can only hope for a standard where I can run Ash Zealot and Lightning Bolt together.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 02:33
|
|
|
morning wood posted:Oh nice I wouldn't complain if that one got reprinted. Needless to say I'm an uber noob and only play standard My favorite fact about Lightning Bolt is that it's part of a cycle: pay 1 mana, get 3 of something. The white one, Healing Salve, is pretty bad. The blue one, Ancestral Recall, is bugfuck amazing and is widely considered one of the best cards ever printed. The black one, Dark Ritual, is really good, but not quite as good as Recall. Bolt's the red one; they bring it out when they need to bring down the power level of creatures. The green one, Giant Growth, is considered well-balanced and is in every core set except 2012 and 2013. vOv fucked around with this message at 02:49 on Mar 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 02:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 18:23 |
|
|
When they made that cycle did they view them as all equal in power level?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 02:41
|
|