|
Sleep of Bronze posted:Oh, hey, WotC totally buggered up their pre-orders for that and I didn't know it was out yet. Gods, yes! Bring this trainwreck home.
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 14:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 15:33 |
|
|
So I somehow missed that the fall duel deck is "Speed vs Cunning". Probably because no one cared because that sounds super boring and 
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 14:35
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:Gods, yes! Yes, this please! Sleep of Bronze's summary of the first book almost made it sound interesting!
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 14:36
|
|
|
It's gonna be a red and/or green deck with a bunch of hasty creatures vs. a blue and/or black control deck. I don't think it's gonna be boring, necessarily. Jace vs. Vraska wasn't too terrible.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 14:37
|
|
|
Veyrall posted:It's gonna be a red and/or green deck with a bunch of hasty creatures vs. a blue and/or black control deck. I don't think it's gonna be boring, necessarily. Jace vs. Vraska wasn't too terrible. I'm sure they can make the card selection interesting, it just seems like a very uninspired concept for a duel deck. Maybe it ties into the fall block somehow?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 14:42
|
|
|
Entropic posted:I'm sure they can make the card selection interesting, it just seems like a very uninspired concept for a duel deck. Maybe it ties into the fall block somehow? Considering the past two "faction" duel decks have been "Golgari vs. Izzet" and "Heroes vs. Monsters", yes. I would also expect the next planeswalker Duel Deck to involve two planeswalkers from Theros block. Maybe Elspeth vs. Xenagos? Or if that's too on the nose, Kiora vs. Ashiok?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 14:53
|
|
|
They did the same nonsense with Heroes vs Monsters. I am starting to suspect they are not bothering with having strong themes in their dual decks and are just doing "A magic deck vs another magic deck, I guess." with this Speeds vs Cunning.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 14:53
|
|
|
Kabanaw posted:Considering the past two "faction" duel decks have been "Golgari vs. Izzet" and "Heroes vs. Monsters", yes. I would also expect the next planeswalker Duel Deck to involve two planeswalkers from Theros block. Maybe Elspeth vs. Xenagos? Or if that's too on the nose, Kiora vs. Ashiok? Ajani vs Ashiok 
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 15:41
|
|
|
Veyrall posted:It's gonna be a red and/or green deck with a bunch of hasty creatures vs. a blue and/or black control deck. I don't think it's gonna be boring, necessarily. Jace vs. Vraska wasn't too terrible. Jace vs. Vraska was very one sided when I used it...
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 15:49
|
|
|
Kabanaw posted:Or if that's too on the nose, Kiora vs. Ashiok? Kiora vs. Thassa! Who cares if it's blue all the way down?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 15:57
|
|
|
Entropic posted:I'm sure they can make the card selection interesting, it just seems like a very uninspired concept for a duel deck. Maybe it ties into the fall block somehow? I hope so, the description of the speed portion talks about horseman on the steppes so there's some talk about Horsemanship being brought back. Even if it isn't a Mongolian themed block would be pretty rad, especially if the ambush component of the block brings back Traps from Zendikar and a reprint of pit trap and Trap Door Spider from Ice Age.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 15:59
|
|
|
Boxman posted:Kiora vs. Thassa! Who cares if it's blue all the way down? Could happen, Sorin vs Tibalt was BW vs BR. I don't think the name cards have been different supertypes though.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 16:01
|
|
|
BizarroAzrael posted:Could happen, Sorin vs Tibalt was BW vs BR. I don't think the name cards have been different supertypes though. Phyrexia vs the Coalition had Urza's Rage and Phyrexian Negator as the face cards.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 16:03
|
|
|
All this Hex vs MTG chat is cute and all, but I literally did not know Hex was A Thing until it was posted just now, and I will never play Hex because it is Not Magic The Gathering. hth also those Conspiracy spoilers look sweet as hell. Wish it was on MODO tho 
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 16:12
|
|
|
Gyshall posted:All this Hex vs MTG chat is cute and all, but I literally did not know Hex was A Thing until it was posted just now, and I will never play Hex because it is Not Magic The Gathering. hth Some of the Conspiracy cards will be in Vintage Masters which will be on MTGO.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 16:14
|
|
|
I didn't think that is care what happens to cryptozooic but they make the adventure time card wars game  Well if they're using similar mechanics why shouldn't they use tried and tested cards and develop from there? No need to reinvent the wheel here.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 16:19
|
|
|
LightReaper posted:A great post. Thanks for this. Threshold is still sorta confusing, but from what I gather, it's like as if you have 1 Mountain, you can cast as many spells with R in the mana cost, unlike Magic where you'll only cast 1. That's a little different for sure. I think you're absolutely right in not wanting the status quo to continue and that it's good to vote with your money for a company to do things better, but I really can't act like Cryptozoic has the moral high ground here when they've nearly copied Magic's game mechanics, balance, and even some of the simpler cards. Just because a company isn't doing what you want with a product doesn't mean someone else can wholesale lift it and do it themselves. Or maybe it does, a lot of people keep citing copyright law, but come on. I guess I should disclaimer this with I only play paper Magic and have never been interested in MTGO (because it looks like hot boiled rear end). I'm insanely interested in Hex now for sure, and if it came out and was as slick as DotP with the convenience of MTGO, I'd probably play the poo poo out of it. But just because Hex looks cool as hell and WotC loving sucks at making MTGO doesn't suddenly blot out the fact that a LOT of Hex is just lifted from Magic. e: I still seriously can't get over lifting the color pie, of all things. That's the most damning part of it, it's such an iconic Magic thing and such an easy place to make the game your own, lifting that is just stupid. Cut green and roll it into the other colors, make a 6th, jesus do anything.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 16:29
|
|
|
How do you figure in the fact Hex can only exist because WOTC has been negligent insofar as MTGO for year after year? I don't know how people want to describe the relationship WOTC has with its MTGO client base, but that relationship is the entire crux of Hex's existence. I'm going to say the relationship is not good, if not outright dishonest and some other mean words. If MTGO was the product it should be instead of what it is after years of mismanagement there wouldn't be any room in the market to begin with. And seriously, it has the revenue stream to make whatever it wants. It's not like they dropped the ball and Hex snuck in, it's more like they've been bouncing it off our faces for a decade. I am mad. Mad about MTGO. (Not actually playing Hex though)
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 16:38
|
|
|
Hex being able to put cards in your opponents deck is really cool and I kinda wish magic would explore that space in one of their online games. I know that's never gonna happen but I can hope...
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 16:46
|
|
|
Wait, you think Hex could only exist because people are mad at MTGO? That there's no value in trying to incorporate electronic devices and evolve the medium of board games?  I think it'll take a few years since many require apple/android-only devices but there's potential here.Sidenote but I am not a true believer and haven't kickstarted it or whatever they did. I just see the good this does for game design. Practically everyone carries around a tablet and smartphone these days. Soothing Cacophony posted:e: I still seriously can't get over lifting the color pie, of all things. That's the most damning part of it, it's such an iconic Magic thing and such an easy place to make the game your own, lifting that is just stupid. Cut green and roll it into the other colors, make a 6th, jesus do anything.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 16:54
|
|
|
I don't think I ever said anything regarding how Hex could exist? I said I don't see Cryptozoic as these bullied little guys who never did nothing wrong when they are lifting a lot of Magic wholesale. Just because you're doing it better doesn't mean it isn't stealing (though honestly, maybe it isn't, I guess the lawsuit will settle that).
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 17:05
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:I didn't think that is care what happens to cryptozooic but they make the adventure time card wars game Because that's plagiarism?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 17:06
|
|
|
Soothing Cacophony posted:Thanks for this. Threshold is still sorta confusing, but from what I gather, it's like as if you have 1 Mountain, you can cast as many spells with R in the mana cost, unlike Magic where you'll only cast 1. That's a little different for sure. They also have stated that this first set is deliberately restrained as it is the introduction to the game, they don't want to scare people away with lots of complexity so their cards had to start off fairly basic. While I cannot even hope to defend the direct card analogues from one game to another, the fact that their unique cards are so interesting (transforming cards, escalation, inspire and some of the dwarf/robot cards) gives me and a lot of the backers for the game faith that future sets will do a lot more to distance the two games just because they can start to experiment a bit more liberally. You even start to see this reflected in some of the PvE cards they've previewed, which they can go a bit wild on because they don't have as much pressure to make it super balanced, take Spectral Assassin for example:  This is really cool! And if you wanted to build a deck around it you could give your champion equipment that specifically powers it up, like this: Silent Strike Armor - Armor: "When this troop dies, put it from your graveyard into your hand, and it begins stalking a new target." There's a very interesting discussion to be had about business practices in Gaming - in particular the adaptation (and sometimes wholesale replicating) of gameplay mechanics made popular in successful franchises, but it is a practice that exists pretty much everywhere. Tell the fanbase of Candy Crush Saga they are playing a Bejeweled clone and I'd doubt they'd care, JRPGs are like some weird incestuous hot pot of copied game mechanics, story beats and character designs. Hell, Mantic Games are making a name for themselves entirely off of the back of taking Games Workshop franchises and sticking a new coat of paint on them. Once I got past the morality of it, I realized that hey this is pretty cool!
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 17:07
|
|
|
IANAL but even if Wizards doesn't really have a case, I'm pretty sure that failing to make efforts to protect IP can be used against you in future cases. Like, if they never challenge Hex, and then another game comes along that's an even closer copy, the defendants in that situation can point to the fact that Wizards did not object to Hex being such a close copy and that might actually work against Wizards.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 17:07
|
|
|
Soothing Cacophony posted:I don't think I ever said anything regarding how Hex could exist? I said I don't see Cryptozoic as these bullied little guys who never did nothing wrong when they are lifting a lot of Magic wholesale. Just because you're doing it better doesn't mean it isn't stealing (though honestly, maybe it isn't, I guess the lawsuit will settle that). The problem is how can you take 2 cards from a card game, that both cards have the same resource cost, down to the number of variable plus colored resources (2W) and the same effect, and demostrate that this happens multiple times and not be some violation of some trademark, patent, copyright, or something. There is no way it can be legal to blantently rip something offl ike that. Its like making a shoe company called Shnike and our logo is the Smoosh and it happens to be shaped like a rounded checkmark, and our signature shoe is an Air Jordanian but we're totally not ripping anything off no sir.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 17:14
|
|
|
jassi007 posted:
Not to derail too much but has GR fallen off the face of the earth? An old friend is coming to FNM tomorrow and he wants me to build a GR deck.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 17:16
|
|
|
Cryptozoic should have just included a disclaimer in the rules like these guys did.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
forbidden lesbian posted:Hex being able to put cards in your opponents deck is really cool and I kinda wish magic would explore that space in one of their online games. I know that's never gonna happen but I can hope... pwnage will never happen
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 17:24
|
|
|
jassi007 posted:The problem is how can you take 2 cards from a card game, that both cards have the same resource cost, down to the number of variable plus colored resources (2W) and the same effect, and demostrate that this happens multiple times and not be some violation of some trademark, patent, copyright, or something. There is no way it can be legal to blantently rip something offl ike that. Game mechanics can't be copyrighted. This is why stuff like Rifts copying AD&D 2e and 13th Age copying D&D 4e (and assorted other obvious cloning/inspiration that happens all the time in the tabletop game space) is totally legit. The part that can be copyrighted is the expression of it, which includes names, art, card styling, background plot stuff, and so on. Hex hasn't copied those. Game mechanics can potentially be patented, and Wizards has a patent, but it's a crazy over-broad one that would run into prior art issues if actually pressed (it was filed in 1995 and other competing TCGs were being released in 1994), not to mention making claims that would run into prior art issues with RPGs that existed well before Magic did ("each player constructing their own library of a predetermined number of game components by examining and selecting game components from the reservoir of game components" as compared to the endless parade of 2e D&D books, etc).
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 17:24
|
|
|
Hey guys, quick rules question from a relative newbie. If I have Young Pyromancer out and play Hour of Need, does the elemental reach the battlefield before I can choose targets for strive?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 17:31
|
|
|
Sleep of Bronze posted:Oh, hey, WotC totally buggered up their pre-orders for that and I didn't know it was out yet. That would be pretty great, yes.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 17:34
|
|
|
Snacksmaniac posted:Go Do It Its certainly become less popular, but much like Monoblack Devotion, a lot of the decks are just splashing black to get Abrupt Decay (or Dreadbore) due to Temple of Malady. Skillface posted:Hey guys, quick rules question from a relative newbie. No, the Strive targets need to be selected and the mana cost for the whole spell paid in order to put it on the stack. Angry Grimace fucked around with this message at 17:47 on May 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 17:35
|
|
|
.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 17:42
|
|
|
Skillface posted:Hey guys, quick rules question from a relative newbie. The elemental reaches the battlefield after you choose strive targets. It may seem convoluted in tabletop Magic, but when you cast a spell you have to choose the targets and pay the cost(s) right then. Once that happens and the spell is on the stack, that's when Young Pyromancer would trigger and the Elemental would enter the battlefield.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 17:43
|
|
|
Skillface posted:Hey guys, quick rules question from a relative newbie. You have to choose targets before you cast it.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 17:43
|
|
|
Here's a question for you, unrelated to Hex chat: why is Strive written in a way that's totally backwards from how you actually use it? It seems like the templating would be a lot more intuitive if it was written in a way that added extra targets to a one-target spell instead of the existing version.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 17:44
|
|
|
Bugsy posted:You have to choose targets before you cast it. This is what I figured, thanks!
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 17:45
|
|
|
Roadie posted:Here's a question for you, unrelated to Hex chat: why is Strive written in a way that's totally backwards from how you actually use it? It seems like the templating would be a lot more intuitive if it was written in a way that added extra targets to a one-target spell instead of the existing version. I'm not sure I'm following how Strive isn't intuitive. Its functionally the same as Multikicker, but they wanted to call it something else.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 17:49
|
|
|
^ ^ OH FFS  Roadie posted:Here's a question for you, unrelated to Hex chat: why is Strive written in a way that's totally backwards from how you actually use it? It seems like the templating would be a lot more intuitive if it was written in a way that added extra targets to a one-target spell instead of the existing version. Because they didn't want to just say "kicker" on cards in the third set, even though that's all it is.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 17:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 15:33 |
|
|
Roadie posted:Here's a question for you, unrelated to Hex chat: why is Strive written in a way that's totally backwards from how you actually use it? It seems like the templating would be a lot more intuitive if it was written in a way that added extra targets to a one-target spell instead of the existing version. I think the current templating of strive is a way of clarifying that you can't target the same creature twice with it. If it was "one target, plus extra targets for each W" it would require more clarification.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 17:52
|
|