|
gang sines posted:is there an argument behind this or just the assertion because colors having distinct identities would be pretty far down my list The colors have actual strategic limitations, not whatever you can justify with flavor (which is literally anything in any color). Again, Maro makes the point better than I can: quote:The point of a game is to have restrictions and to have to find creative ways to work around it. The color pie is restrictive on purpose.[emphasis in original] It’s supposed to make it hard for colors to do certain things. Every time we stretch the color pie, we lessen what it does for the game and what it does is essential to its longterm health.
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 21:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 16:21 |
|
|
blue can do everything, littorally.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 21:37
|
|
|
Hyper Crab Tank posted:Edit: ^^^ why even have colors if every color can do everything? One of the fundamental principles of deckbuilding is that because every color can't do everything, your choice of color to play is actually meaningful. i'm not opposed to colors in magic at all, and not of the opinion that we should just print everything in one color, but i am also not of the opinion that some bleed around the edges of the color pie is going to ruin magic. creature removal is imo one of the important effects in magic and green having inefficient removal options that don't demand a bigger dude on board is not something that i believe is self evidently bad. another example imo is wotc adding red card "draw". it's worse than blue because it doesn't keep it in hand if it can't cast it right away, but it means red is not reliant on hitting splash cards to have access to one of the fundamental parts of magic, card advantage. should red get straight card draw? no, i don't think so, but Maro has also pushed this whole "red shouldn't get card advantage it's not in their pie" and i think that's dumb. also while i like how colors are executed in magic i also wouldn't just take it on faith that them not existing as wholly distinct entities would turn it into a bad game, which is what i was quoting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 21:37
|
|
|
Hyper Crab Tank posted:This is literally completely incoherent, geez. Let's not get so mad about wizard poker, yeah? It's a real dumb thing to say. A mediocre green version of O-Ring does not suddenly make all the colors interchangeable. Angry Grimace posted:The colors have actual strategic limitations, not whatever you can justify with flavor (which is literally anything in any color). Again, Maro makes the point better than I can: That rationale can just as easily be applied to cards like Act on Impulse and Hunt the Weak, both of them violate the color pie just as much as Hornet Queen and Song of the Dryads. It basically boils down to "breaking the color pie is OK when Maro says it is" and It'd be cool if he was at least honest about it. Ciprian Maricon fucked around with this message at 21:44 on Oct 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 21:39
|
|
|
gang sines posted:i'm not opposed to colors in magic at all, and not of the opinion that we should just print everything in one color, but i am also not of the opinion that some bleed around the edges of the color pie is going to ruin magic. creature removal is imo one of the important effects in magic and green having inefficient removal options that don't demand a bigger dude on board is not something that i believe is self evidently bad. The restrictions on color identity is what makes color choice a meaningful one. Ciprian Maricon posted:It's a real dumb thing to say. A mediocre green version of O-Ring does not suddenly make all the colors interchangeable. Your clarification of your original, incoherent point is just a strawman.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 21:40
|
|
|
gang sines posted:i'm not opposed to colors in magic at all, and not of the opinion that we should just print everything in one color, but i am also not of the opinion that some bleed around the edges of the color pie is going to ruin magic Clearly "some bleed" is not going to kill Magic, no. There have been plenty of good bleed just in recent years. Some bad bleed too, but hey. But it comes down to what I said earlier, that you have to do it for a good reason and with a plan, not just randomly going "hey, guess what green, you now have access to Oblivion Ring because reasons". gang sines posted:also while i like how colors are executed in magic i also wouldn't just take it on faith that them not existing as wholly distinct entities would turn it into a bad game, which is what i was quoting. I don't think the guy you quoted was saying that. E: Ciprian Maricon posted:It's a real dumb thing to say. A mediocre green version of O-Ring does not suddenly make all the colors interchangeable. Good thing I didn't say that, then. Dodged a real bullet there, let me tell ya. I couldn't have done it without you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 21:40
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:The colors have actual strategic limitations, not whatever you can justify with flavor (which is literally anything in any color). Again, Maro makes the point better than I can: see above, but also the quote in this post is maro's johnny/designer bias, to him the valuable part of magic gameplay is deckbuilding and i think that is short sighted. restrictions and problems pop up during play, even if you are handed a deck that you had no input in building, and working around those is as much part of the game as is working around deckbuilding restrictions.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 21:40
|
|
|
Hyper Crab Tank posted:Clearly "some bleed" is not going to kill Magic, no. There have been plenty of good bleed just in recent years. Some bad bleed too, but hey. But it comes down to what I said earlier, that you have to do it for a good reason and with a plan, not just randomly going "hey, guess what green, you now have access to Oblivion Ring because reasons". the reason is it lets green interact with one of the fundamental aspects of the game, creatures, in a less terrible way when for whatever reason splashing is impractical. splashing is still better than playing this, but it creates a choice that you have to make. this is why fight was a good keyword too, because it let green cope with creatures in a way that wasn't "hope they chump block/attack". quote:I don't think the guy you quoted was saying that. "Because the fact that colors have distinct identities is what makes Magic good." seems pretty absolute but i am willing to accept that i am being uncharitable in my reading! Angry Grimace posted:The restrictions on color identity is what makes color choice a meaningful one. those restrictions are far from gone, and color choice is far from the only meaningful choice in magic.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 21:43
|
|
|
Somehow I should've known that the old grognard chestnut of, "if everyone is special nobody is special" would appear in the magic thread someday.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
gang sines posted:the reason is it lets green interact with one of the fundamental aspects of the game, creatures, in a less terrible way when for whatever reason splashing is impractical. splashing is still better than playing this, but it creates a choice that you have to make. this is why fight was a good keyword too, because it let green cope with creatures in a way that wasn't "hope they chump block/attack". You don't need to break the color pie for this. Green having a harder time dealing with creatures is its primary weakness.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
gang sines posted:the reason is it lets green interact with one of the fundamental aspects of the game, creatures, in a less terrible way when for whatever reason splashing is impractical. splashing is still better than playing this, but it creates a choice that you have to make. this is why fight was a good keyword too, because it let green cope with creatures in a way that wasn't "hope they chump block/attack". I just wanted to say something about splashing: the whole point of the colors being distinct is exactly so that one deck can't do everything without paying some sort of cost. In Magic, a big part of the cost of being able to do more things in the same deck is that splashing makes your mana less reliable. Basically, "splashing for this effect is impractical" is the game working exactly as intended. If splashing didn't have a cost associated with it we'd be straying back towards colors-not-mattering territory again. It doesn't make choice more interesting, it makes them worse, since now you know you're always going to be at least mediocre at doing everything and don't have to make tough choices like whether to splash for effects or not. That being said fight is a great keyword and everyone thinks it is, Maro included. Fight is the real answer to the problem of green interacting with creatures. Combined with lure effects and combat untapping I think that problem is pretty much solved for now. But I really don't think green needed to have Oblivion Ring, and yeah, it's the precedent more than anything in the end.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 21:47
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:Somehow I should've known that the old grognard chestnut of, "if everyone is special nobody is special" would appear in the magic thread someday. I haven't seen the bingo card in a long time, but "[CARDNAME] breaks the color pie" is surely on there, right?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 21:47
|
|
|
sarmhan posted:
i mention fight in my post :I also i'm not of the opinion that this card is some hugely important printing, i think it's going to be fairly irrelevant, i just disagree with Maro's rabid color pie orthodoxy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
gang sines posted:i mention fight in my post :I
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 21:53
|
|
|
gang sines posted:also i'm not of the opinion that this card is some hugely important printing, i think it's going to be fairly irrelevant, i just disagree with Maro's rabid color pie orthodoxy. It's not even orthodoxy, he fully approves of green having creature removal via the fight mechanic and red can totally have "draw" via the exile and play thing it's doing lately but he gets super mad that a flying bug has deathtouch, its super dumb.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 21:53
|
|
|
sarmhan posted:Maro's hardline stance is because he believes that printing color-pie breaking stuff in eternal formats creates a precedent for it to appear again in standard formats- see Hornet Queen in M15. Heck, you can see it in Song of the Dryads. Someone probably spent a lot of time pointing at Beast Within and going "look, it's fine, we did it in New Phyrexia!"
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 21:54
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:I haven't seen the bingo card in a long time, but "[CARDNAME] breaks the color pie" is surely on there, right? I suppose it's just a different way of saying it but the "if nobody.." Version sounds more sophisticated and plausible. And was uttered by that cool guy in the incredibles.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
It is fine though, Neither Beast Within nor Song of the Dryads has changed the fact that if you're playing a heavily green focused deck you're seriously hosed when it comes to efficient removal, especially in the eternal format. Green still lives under the exact same restrictions it did before this piece of top tier kitchen table jank got printed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 21:59
|
|
|
Should Abzan ever board out their coursers? Like in the matchup against G/x?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 22:00
|
|
|
Ciprian Maricon posted:It's not even orthodoxy, he fully approves of green having creature removal via the fight mechanic and red can totally have "draw" via the exile and play thing it's doing lately but he gets super mad that a flying bug has deathtouch, its super dumb. Best part about that is the last time I read his whining about Hornet Queen it was because "a bee shouldn't have Deathtouch." Dude doesn't even know what a Hornet is apparently.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 22:00
|
|
|
gang sines posted:i mention fight in my post :I Its less that its going to be game-breaking and more that it creates precedent for similar cards (and even in this thread there are posts defending Song as being similar to other green effects which already shouldn't exist). Vintage and Legacy as formats are heavily reliant on blue based mostly on things that are no longer in blue's color pie at all (e.g. Force of Will's paying life and cards for a spell, which is totally black) for either mechanical reasons or cost reasons (Brainstorm costing 1 mana). Cernunnos posted:Best part about that is the last time I read his whining about Hornet Queen it was because "a bee shouldn't have Deathtouch." Actually the exact quote is: What didn't you like about Hornet Queen? Is it the fact that its basically 5 little kill spells on a stick? A: "It’s essentially a 6/6 flier in green with no particular justification other than someone behind the scenes liked the card. Decisions like that are dangerous to the long term health of the color pie." http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/91557676133/what-didnt-you-like-about-hornet-queen-is-it-the-fact That doesn't sound either nonsensical or even unsound. Angry Grimace fucked around with this message at 22:03 on Oct 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 22:00
|
|
|
^^^^^ vintage/legacy are a fine example of this not being that big of a deal, force being blue instead of black hasn't made deckmaking decisions irrelevant or collapsed the metagame into a single deck or anything like that. mono blue is not rampant despite the best cards all being blue and covering a ton of effects, people still find plenty of good reason to play all of the five colors.Hyper Crab Tank posted:Heck, you can see it in Song of the Dryads. Someone probably spent a lot of time pointing at Beast Within and going "look, it's fine, we did it in New Phyrexia!" but who cares, which deck that can play this card is going to eagerly slam this into their 75 short of actual restrictions like the color identity rule or financial issues or whatever? the decks that can pick the best balance of mana stability/card quality are not going to play this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 22:09
|
|
|
A buddy of mine is rolling with Abzan midrange tomorrow for a 5K. Does anyone have any tips for playing against Green/x Midrange? He's running Fleecemanes maindeck, list is more or less this http://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/249779#online minus the Hornet Queen and with a third Wingmate Roc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 22:09
|
|
|
gang sines posted:^^^^^ vintage/legacy are a fine example of this not being that big of a deal, force being blue instead of black hasn't made deckmaking decisions irrelevant or collapsed the metagame into a single deck or anything like that. mono blue is not rampant despite the best cards all being blue and covering a ton of effects, people still find plenty of good reason to play all of the five colors. Mono-anything isn't rampant in Vintage or Legacy. Yet Force of Will and Brainstorm are in something around 80% of the viable decks, e.g. blue is played in 80% of the viable decks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 22:12
|
|
|
I don't get the obsession with precedent. Precedent didn't mean gently caress all when it came to make creatures better they just said "hmmm its probably better if we make creatures better" and then they did but apparently the occasional card that violates the color pie is going to become some massive albatross around the designers neck?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 22:12
|
|
|
Is Ascendancy likely to be banned before the pro tour?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 22:17
|
|
|
TheKingofSprings posted:A buddy of mine is rolling with Abzan midrange tomorrow for a 5K. Does anyone have any tips for playing against Green/x Midrange? He's running Fleecemanes maindeck, list is more or less this http://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/249779#online minus the Hornet Queen and with a third Wingmate Roc. Here's a tip for playing Abzan Midrange: just throw your cards down on the table and roll your face across your deck and playmat like a loving animal. just have someone count out how much mana you can have each turn and then play the card with that CMC
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
He doesn't have a playmat though what does he do then
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 22:20
|
|
|
Hyper Crab Tank posted:Heck, you can see it in Song of the Dryads. Someone probably spent a lot of time pointing at Beast Within and going "look, it's fine, we did it in New Phyrexia!" That might very well be the case, and it would be perfectly valid logic because Beast Within really hasn't been that big a deal at all. e: make a variant that's Beast Within except it makes a 1/1 flying deathtouch hornet; watch Maro poo poo himself to death like a dysentery victim on the Oregon Trail.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
Ciprian Maricon posted:They've reprinted Shocks, Thoughtseize, and Fetchlands in rapid succession I don't think they can push modern reprints much more without Standard flat out becoming an unappealing option. That's the thing though, rapid succession means over the last two years, and in those last two years the prices of staples that haven't shown up in Standard have gone bananas. I'm certain that WotC has zero interest in making Modern more appealing than Standard since their existence is predicated on Selling Packs of Cards, but I think they also believe they're aware that they need a format that appeals to entrenched players to support the stores that sell packs and keep those players buying the occasional pack or two. I don't think Modern will ever be a cheap format to play well in, but there's probably a level of reprints that would support keeping interested players engaged in pouring money into Modern while keeping Standard as the main go-to constructed format. I think they're way below that level right now and I think it runs the risk of pushing some of those entrenched players out of the format entirely, especially when they slam a huge shakeup into the format like Treasure Cruise. I mentioned it briefly in the Eternal thread, but attendance has been way down at my LGS' Modern night while FNM Standard and Draft are right about the same or better attended than before. If a player's only modern deck that they've been working on putting together for a year or two suddenly gets substantially worse over the course of a few weeks they have the option of continuing the same deck and getting crushed all the time, acquiring new cards to tune the deck to make the matchup better, putting together a whole new deck, or dropping out of the format. Changing decks in Standard is way easier than changing decks in Modern if you don't have the resources to keep a library of staples on hand, especially since the card pool is so much smaller. I think WotC would probably be in a better place if they were able to keep reprints at a level where the average player who is super interested in a format is able to think about changing decks as an expensive but achievable proposition over a sell my kidneys or quit playing proposition. Reprinting the Shocks and bringing ONS Fetches onboard has been a big deal for helping with that, but the interest in the format is way outpacing the supply of available cards.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:Is Ascendancy likely to be banned before the pro tour? I doubt it. Now, Treasure Cruise and Dig Through Time might be...
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 22:42
|
|
|
Sotar posted:I doubt it. There was a Chapin article a while back that suggested Ascendancy got very close to a pre-Worlds ban and that he expects all three to get axed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 22:58
|
|
Rinkles posted:Is Ascendancy likely to be banned before the pro tour? In Modern, yes, since the natural Banned list update is in January.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 23:00
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:Mono-anything isn't rampant in Vintage or Legacy. Yet Force of Will and Brainstorm are in something around 80% of the viable decks, e.g. blue is played in 80% of the viable decks. what does color pie bleed negatively impact in the long term health of the game, and how are legacy/vintage examples of that? not that i would agree with legacy/vintage being unhealthy because of the ubiquity of force of will but i feel like that's your take on it based on these posts. e: also happy halloween fellow satanist recruitment tool aficionados black potus fucked around with this message at 23:07 on Oct 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 23:00
|
|
|
AgentSythe posted:blue can do everything, littorally. I'm deeply disappointed that the Magic thread has not given this the reaction it deserves. You absolute fucker, Sythe.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
AnacondaHL posted:In Modern, yes, since the natural Banned list update is in January. Kinda wanted to see a crazy PT (probably either a very boring or exciting one), but there is Worlds. As a spectator, I think it would/will be fun to see cruise/dig in play a little longer even if they're ultimately too good (seeing the meta change w/ sequential bannings (cruise, followed by dig) would be pretty cool).
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 23:10
|
|
|
I like how some of you have written more words about Maro disliking Hornet Queen than Maro has written about disliking Hornet Queen.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 23:10
|
|
|
I just noticed this on MaRo's blog.quote:gamestrumpreality said: Whats the ruling on having the new ob nixilis planeswalker and a regular ob nixilis? Can they both be out on the field at the same time as per the planeswalker rule? That's...incorrect, right? You can have Xenagos and Xenagod out on the field at the same time just fine.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
qbert posted:I just noticed this on MaRo's blog.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 16:21 |
|
|
qbert posted:I just noticed this on MaRo's blog. He's wrong, one is a planeswalker and the other is a legendary demon, they don't do anything to each other.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 23:30
|
|
