|
Serperoth posted:They kept Howling Mine with the changed text, because it had been reprinted with the new text. That's why there's a discrepancy. Yeah, I really wish they hadn't done that at all. They really messed up Loxodon Warhammer with their stupid lifelink errata change, and if they hadn't reprinted it it would be fine now!
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 17:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 03:08 |
|
|
JAMOOOL posted:The original printing of Time Vault wasn't a combo with Flame Fusillade correct? I get why they wanted to get rid of as much functional errata as they could, but isn't Time Vault as printed just incredibly broken? Nah, you can still die to your own Mana Crypts and Dark Confidants when you're taking infinite turns. It's totally balanced.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 17:19
|
|
|
Time Vault was pretty fair until they printed Voltaic Key, IIRC.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
Attorney at Funk posted:Nah, you can still die to your own Mana Crypts and Dark Confidants when you're taking infinite turns. It's totally balanced. One of my local nerd stores has monthly, sanctioned vintage tournaments. The owner plays Ral Zarek (and Key obviously) to get infinite turns off of Time Vault. It's hilarious to see him get the combo off. And turn 1 is definitely possible if Force doesn't come up.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 17:35
|
|
|
LordSaturn posted:Time Vault was pretty fair until they printed Voltaic Key, IIRC. I thought that with twiddle it was always broken. Not infinite broken but to pay B for an extra turn was p spicy at the time.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
BDM doing a bit on the video by opening a "Dog Pack" with 15 Akroan Mastiffs in it.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 17:44
|
|
|
JAMOOOL posted:The original printing of Time Vault wasn't a combo with Flame Fusillade correct? I get why they wanted to get rid of as much functional errata as they could, but isn't Time Vault as printed just incredibly broken? At some point WotC decided (correctly, imo) that they wanted the cards to match the latest printed wording instead of intended functionality, and if that leads to cards being broken then so be it, that's what the B&R lists are for. Edit: Flash is probably the premier example here. Elyv fucked around with this message at 18:28 on May 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 18:04
|
|
|
odiv posted:Are there any formats that take a page from racing and have a baked in requirement to sell your deck for $x upon request? People tend to do this with Pauper EDH decks...because the decks themselves usually are only worth like $15 TOPS.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 18:11
|
|
|
The original text on Time Vault was an anomaly, even at the time. Let's look at some Mono Artifacts: Black Lotus: "Adds 3 mana of any single color of your choice to your mana pool, then is discarded. Tapping this artifact can be played as an interrupt." Rod of Ruin: "3: Rod of Ruin does 1 damage to any target." Glasses of Urza: "You may look at opponent's hand." Now, remember, Mono Artifacts by rule tapped as part of the cost to get their effect. Notice how none of those cards explicitly tell you that tapping is part of the cost. That was the standard. Now, Time Vault: "Tap to gain an additional turn after the current one. Time Vault doesn't untap normally during untap phase; to untap it, you must skip a turn. Time Vault begins tapped." It's an odd one. It specifically tells you to tap it to gain the effect despite being printed as a Mono Artifact. Additionally, the entire rules text is one windy paragraph. The abilities aren't broken up. So, if we look at it one way, it does say "to untap it; you must skip a turn.", which you could infer means untapping at any time fails without skipping a turn (it was at one point errata'ed this way by using a replacement effect). But, viewed another way, "Time Vault doesn't untap normally during untap phase; to untap it, you must skip a turn." is a singular sentence, implying that the turn skipping mechanism only involves the untap step. That's the way it currently works. However, the key to translating it properly lies with another card: Basalt Monolith: "Tap to add 3 colorless mana to your mana pool. Does not untap as normal during untap phase, but can be untapped at any time for 3 mana. Tapping this artifact can be played as an interrupt." Reading these 2 cards together, it's pretty clear that the turn skipping is tied to the untap step, and that any other untap effect would work with it normally. To lend support to the original version, remember that there were 2 original combos with Time Vault: Time Vault + Twiddle Time Vault + Animate Artifact + Instill Energy/Jandor's Saddlebags And even back then, Wizards went with that version. Here's a transcript from CompuServe's RPGames Forum in November 1993 with Dave Howell, the then Production Manager of WotC discussing the combos: http://gantopian.com/media/Marvin%20Itis/WotC@compuserv.txt The combo eventually led to Time Vault getting banned (I believe this may have happened in the May 2004 Duelist Supplement), then errata'ed at least 3 times, before finally being reverted back to the version we know and love today.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
PleasantDirge posted:I thought that with twiddle it was always broken. Not infinite broken but to pay B for an extra turn was p spicy at the time. There have always been ways to break the game with Time Vault. I'd prefer they just ban Time Vault or keep the old errata, but that's just the perils of Vintage. The worst part to me is that I think the errata is more correct than the original wording. The intent of Time Vault is that you need to skip a turn to gain a turn with Time Vault.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 18:34
|
|
|
PleasantDirge posted:I thought that with twiddle it was always broken. Not infinite broken but to pay B for an extra turn was p spicy at the time. Hi please use U for blue and B for black because that's how it's always been done. Toshimo posted:Time vault templating Mark Gottlieb's line of reasoning for removing the Flame Fusillade interaction to one that used time counters and untapping only during the upkeep and like only once or something (i.e. the iteration before the current one iirc) was that Time Vault was supposed to work like Mana Vault. Stephen Menedian was pretty mad about this.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 18:44
|
|
|
Elyv posted:At some point WotC decided (correctly, imo) that they wanted the cards to match the latest printed wording instead of intended functionality, and if that leads to cards being broken then so be it, that's what the B&R lists are for. I'm okay with this, even in the case of Flash (which kinda ruined the 5-color format). Time Vault however is such an oddball; even today it's mostly known for its long history of errata, as a card that was pretty much NEVER used as intended (and was completely broken when used otherwise). I remember people getting excited about Magosi - "whoa! this is Time Vault!" then "whoa! Time Vault kinda blows!".
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 18:59
|
|
|
JAMOOOL posted:The original printing of Time Vault wasn't a combo with Flame Fusillade correct? I get why they wanted to get rid of as much functional errata as they could, but isn't Time Vault as printed just incredibly broken? Yes. That's why it's banned in Legacy and Restricted in Vintage and still has Vintage decks built around it
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:01
|
|
|
Lets Pickle posted:Yes. That's why it's banned in Legacy and Restricted in Vintage and still has Vintage decks built around it On the one hand, its just one incredibly broken card that could be fixed, but on the other hand, Vintage is chock full of degenerate combos. If you've ever wondered why Force of Will is $100, its because of that.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
JAMOOOL posted:I'm okay with this, even in the case of Flash (which kinda ruined the 5-color format). Time Vault however is such an oddball; even today it's mostly known for its long history of errata, as a card that was pretty much NEVER used as intended (and was completely broken when used otherwise). I remember people getting excited about Magosi - "whoa! this is Time Vault!" then "whoa! Time Vault kinda blows!". Magosi was actually pretty cool in combo decks against control decks in standard but then they printed Tectonic Edge in Worldwake. Also arguably U/W control wasn't really a full deck until tectonic edge existed but that interaction pretty much killed Magosi as a cute control hoser. The idea was that if the control list had no threats you could activate Magosi and then they would have to keep up multiple counterspells since you threatened extra turns.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:06
|
|
|
Thats cool - I didn't know control was really big then. I wasn't so much into Standard then. And yes I'm aware that Vintage is chock full of degenerate combos, but something like Vault/Key seems even too much for that. Then again I haven't watched an actual game of Vintage for years so I likely have no idea what I'm talking about.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:14
|
|
|
quote:Hi please use U for blue and B for black because that's how it's always been done. I stand corrected on my mistake but I have been playing magic since you were still a glint in the milkman's eye so I will kindly thank you to not tell me "how it's always been done". To be fair BC you are an internet neck beard: the difference between "this is how we do it incorrect mcwrongerton" and "did you mean B or U?" Is me going "Derp! I get that mixed up some times, no super secret B untap tech, just a stoner with a smartphone" instead of questioning your sketchy and possibly bovine parentage. PleasantDirge fucked around with this message at 19:19 on May 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
JAMOOOL posted:Thats cool - I didn't know control was really big then. I wasn't so much into Standard then. Time Vault is already restricted anyway, which is as close to a ban as you get in Vintage unless you're a silver-bordered, ante, or dexterity card. (Shahrazad is an honorary silver-bordered card)
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:18
|
|
|
PleasantDirge posted:I stand corrected on my mistake but I have been playing magic since you were still a glint in the milkman's eye so I will kindly thank you to not tell me "how it's always been done". How is not being an rear end in a top hat on the road like being a Jew at a Nazi gathering?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:19
|
|
|
Let me tell you, I was reading urza saga novels while you were in diapers....
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
PleasantDirge posted:I stand corrected on my mistake but I have been playing magic since you were still a glint in the milkman's eye so I will kindly thank you to not tell me "how it's always been done". Counterpoint:    I don't see how you could present evidence that points farther than that for "how it's always been done". It's actually a factual statement.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:26
|
|
|
Zoness posted:Counterpoint: In any case the comprehensive rules specify {U} as blue and {B} as black
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:28
|
|
|
I like how a 2U, Sacrifice an Island version of Time Walk was deemed not powerful enough in testing. And then the 2U version. VV Well, gotta learn something new every day... Tonfa fucked around with this message at 19:32 on May 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:28
|
|
|
i'll turn my island and forest terrains to invoke my monster for BR, but since it has convocation illness I can't charge
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:28
|
|
|
kirtar posted:In any case the comprehensive rules specify {U} as blue and {B} as black Yeah but I just wanted to argue on the grounds of assuming that timeline is in any way relevant. Tonfa posted:I like how a 2U, Sacrifice an Island version of Time Walk was deemed not powerful enough in testing. It's actually 1U, Sacrifice an Island since pre-alpha templating had the number as the CMC for costs with colorless components. vvv change my name posted:"Lord of Muuuu/uu" Another quirk of templating was that activation costs were listed in the mana cost space after a slash.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:29
|
|
|
"Lord of Muuuu/uu"
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:30
|
|
|
LordSaturn posted:How is not being an rear end in a top hat on the road like being a Jew at a Nazi gathering? Tl:Dr is that I have more sympathy for a group of NYC motorcycle gang members hooning on the highway than I do a guy in a $100k plus SUV. My display of these feelings in gbs via a VERY poor metaphor got me my red title(it was an rear end in a top hat thing to say). I have since learned to explain my feelings more concisely, but still believe that picking a fight with a gang member of any stripe falls under the "welp, they sure did that to themselves/ no self preservation instincts" clause.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
PleasantDirge posted:Tl:Dr is that I have more sympathy for a group of NYC motorcycle gang members hooning on the highway than I do a guy in a $100k plus SUV. My display of these feelings in gbs via a VERY poor metaphor got me my red title(it was an rear end in a top hat thing to say). I have since learned to explain my feelings more concisely, but still believe that picking a fight with a gang member of any stripe falls under the "welp, they sure did that to themselves/ no self preservation instincts" clause. "Hooning" is not, nor has it ever been, a word. Also, if you're talking about what I think, the driver didn't "pick a fight". Just so this isn't 100% off topic; is Force of Will really in Gynovore fucked around with this message at 19:41 on May 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:37
|
|
|
Gynovore posted:"Hooning" is not, nor has it ever been, a word. Also, if you're talking about what I think, the driver didn't "pick a fight". To continue my pedantry streak, it's Vintage Masters, and yes. Also there's already precedent for similar price scales with regards to paper vs online on other cards like JTMS in paper vs online thanks to FTV:20 JTMS.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:39
|
|
|
Gynovore posted:Just so this isn't 100% off topic; is Force of Will really in Modern Masters as a rare? (not Mythic?) This will be an interesting dichotomy, a cards that's worth over a hundred on paper going for about 10 tix online. You can get Underground Seas for 30-40 tix and Juzam Djinns for less than 1. It's not that big of a deal.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:40
|
|
|
Gynovore posted:"Hooning" is not, nor has it ever been, a word. Also, if you're talking about what I think, the driver didn't "pick a fight". Force of Will and Rishadan Port trade spots for the most expensive card on MTGO fairly often. Its going to tumble down, obviously, and how far depends how long VM is available on MTGO. Unlike Modern Masters, they've really said nothing about VM being a limited set. tetsman posted:You can get Underground Seas for 30-40 tix and Juzam Djinns for less than 1. It's not that big of a deal. They're just different economies. Liliana of the Veil is almost 85 tickets now online.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:42
|
|
|
I am blown away by how completely unbearable this ptjou is to watch. SCG coverage was so much better than this garbage.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:43
|
|
|
tetsman posted:You can get Underground Seas for 30-40 tix and Juzam Djinns for less than 1. It's not that big of a deal. Juzam may not be the best example; it used to be the biggest four-mana hitter around, but many many cards have obsoleted it. Aside from the price, easily obtainable Force of Wills will really shake up the online Legacy/casual scene. Four FoW is pretty much the biggest barrier to entry on cardboard.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:Force of Will and Rishadan Port trade spots for the most expensive card on MTGO fairly often. Its going to tumble down, obviously, and how far depends how long VM is available on MTGO. Unlike Modern Masters, they've really said nothing about VM being a limited set. Look I know people hate on Marshall but I mean like, this is kind of a thing. Unless you mean limited in print distribution in which case y'know, not a paper set at all. Then again ME's in the past have had pretty poor distribution in their component duals but I think that's in some part because ME's were awful to draft. Zoness fucked around with this message at 19:48 on May 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:46
|
|
|
Zoness posted:Look I know people hate on Marshall but I mean like, this is kind of a thing. Huh, elephant guide seems really good for a common.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:48
|
|
|
Zoness posted:Look I know people hate on Marshall but I mean like, this is kind of a thing. Is there reason you expect me to read an entire article to figure out what you're talking about instead of just saying it?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:51
|
|
|
Gynovore posted:"Hooning" is not, nor has it ever been, a word. Also, if you're talking about what I think, the driver didn't "pick a fight". Well if we're being pedantic here.....
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:52
|
|
|
JAMOOOL posted:Thats cool - I didn't know control was really big then. I wasn't so much into Standard then. There's so much disruption in Vintage that assembling a two-card combo with restricted cards is actually difficult. If you're on the play against Stax or get lucky on your first (sometimes second) turns against Dredge, you can sometimes pull it off first turn with a god hand. Sometimes people manage to pull off the combo early and just lose to their own Dark Confidants and/or Mana Crypt, which is always fun to watch.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:54
|
|
|
change my name posted:Huh, elephant guide seems really good for a common. Its like an og bestow
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 03:08 |
|
|
BJPaskoff posted:There's so much disruption in Vintage that assembling a two-card combo with restricted cards is actually difficult. If you're on the play against Stax or get lucky on your first (sometimes second) turns against Dredge, you can sometimes pull it off first turn with a god hand. Sometimes people manage to pull off the combo early and just lose to their own Dark Confidants and/or Mana Crypt, which is always fun to watch.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 19:57
|
|
