|
My favorite rules text is still Floral Spuzzem. Does Floral Spuzzem choose to destroy that artifact? ... well, does it?
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 09:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 12:08 |
|
|
The Wicked Wall posted:Thanks for the advice guys; we'll probably try putting in some of the silly blue hate cards first, but if the guy is a dick about it (as he has been about other things) then we'll know where to tell him to stick his deck. So I know this is a bit late, but one of the most hilarious and obscure blue hate cards is Curse of Marit Lage. It might not be as effective as boil, but it certainly is more frustrating for the blue player if they don't run daze/gush/thwart/whatever else.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 09:18
|
|
|
I've always liked Rock Hydra for ridiculous flavor over-explanation: "Don't you get it? the counters are HEADS" Honorable mention to Portal Raging Goblin for most unnecessary reminder text:  WotC should just add "Unless another effect prevents this" to every card ever printed honestly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 13:39
|
|
|
Well, it's Portal. Unnecessary texts and cards for that matter were everywhere.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 13:44
|
|
|
Well yeah, but were there even any cards available at the time that turned off Haste? There were fog effects and stuff, but those don't actually stop you from attacking.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 13:46
|
|
|
LanceKing2200 posted:Well yeah, but were there even any cards available at the time that turned off Haste? There were fog effects and stuff, but those don't actually stop you from attacking. Nope, and the 4 other cards with haste in the first Portal doesn't have the text. The goblin obv. has the superior template.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 13:51
|
|
|
There were cards around that could prevent it from attacking, but I don't recall anything that specifically interacted with Haste.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 13:52
|
|
|
sarmhan posted:There are more Magic references in Binding of Isaac too- Items called Lord of the Pit and Spirit of the Night. How have I sunk like 700 hours into Isaac and not recognized these as Magic references? God DAMNIT.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 13:52
|
|
|
BJPaskoff posted:How have I sunk like 700 hours into Isaac and not recognized these as Magic references? God DAMNIT. I dunno, Spirit of the Night is just close enough to being specific enough that I buy it as a Magic reference, but if not for the other Magic references present, "Lord of the Pit" is just generic enough that I wouldn't assume it was a reference if it was by itself.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 14:06
|
|
|
Why are you guys splashing Red in the timetwister deck, there is no need to make the mana base worse like that. Just play mono blue and kill with Psionic Blast.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 14:39
|
|
|
Clearly Lavalanche is the better option here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 14:41
|
|
|
Crumbling Sanctuary and Goblin Cannon wincon. E: Surely just Denying Wind, right? Only need to use 72 mana casting it to win! is that good fucked around with this message at 16:01 on Nov 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 15:57
|
|
|
Nothing seems impressive anymore ever since seeing that deck that, when played optimally and with a god draw against a goldfish opponent, takes longer than the age of the universe to win.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 16:56
|
|
|
Hyper Crab Tank posted:Nothing seems impressive anymore ever since seeing that deck that, when played optimally and with a god draw against a goldfish opponent, takes longer than the age of the universe to win. Not sure what you're referring to but 4 Horsemen doesn't take that long to win. Also upset that the slow play rules allow multiple pile shuffles on fetchland activations (elaborating this to exclude piling to count cards) but effectively ban Battle of Wits (okay this is probably reasonable) and 4 horsemen (tragic as this deck is a piece of art). Zoness fucked around with this message at 17:07 on Nov 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
Zoness posted:Not sure what you're referring to but 4 Horsemen doesn't take that long to win. There was a challenge to make the deck where you had to set up the slowest win possible. You could control all variables (ie you always choose the outcome of a coin flip, always draw the card you want) but you couldn't go infinite. It was a work of art. Neither of those is really slow play. Battle of Wits is fine if you can shuffle reasonably quickly. It just 4/0'd a modern daily yesterday in most glorious stream I've ever watched. 4 Horsemen is tricky because you're only allowed X iterations of your infinite combo without changing something in the game, and X is 100% arbitrary based on the judge. So maybe you do 6 iterations, declare attacks, do 6 more, cast Ponder, do 6 more, blah blah blah. It seems silly that you can't say "here's my infinite combo. Given an infinite number of cycles, my deck will eventually end up with such and such configuration" and set up your deck in such a way, but eh, them's the rules.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 17:10
|
|
|
I remember the non-infinite 1st turn damage challenge, which ended up with such brutally high numbers it had worked its way through to Conway notation by the end, but not the simple longest possible goldfish challenge.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 17:13
|
|
|
suicidesteve posted:There was a challenge to make the deck where you had to set up the slowest win possible. You could control all variables (ie you always choose the outcome of a coin flip, always draw the card you want) but you couldn't go infinite. It was a work of art. To be fair, cards like surgical and extirpate can reasonably interact with the horsemen loop. Also shuffling 200+ sleeved cards is way harder in paper as opposed on modo Zoness fucked around with this message at 17:36 on Nov 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 17:13
|
|
|
suicidesteve posted:There was a challenge to make the deck where you had to set up the slowest win possible. You could control all variables (ie you always choose the outcome of a coin flip, always draw the card you want) but you couldn't go infinite. It was a work of art. Please tell me you have a list for that Battle of Wits deck. I once participated in a Three Card Magic game to make the slowest possible win. I came up with a deck of Icatian Store, Sustaining Spirit, and Steeling Stance, which takes 426 turns to win. However, the slowest was actually Broodstar, Naked Singularity, Sand Silos, which takes 666 turns to win. My favourite idea for a weird deck is to use the Turing-completeness of Magic to make a deck that wins the game if the Collatz conjecture is true, and draws the game if it's false. The game will be in limbo until someone manages to prove or not prove that conjecture.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 17:28
|
|
|
Chamale posted:Please tell me you have a list for that Battle of Wits deck. http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/04-11-14-aPf-modern-battlepod-10/ The funny thing was he pretty much just won by beating, and once by Angel/Spike Feeder. Every Battle of Wits he cast got Remanded or countered.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 17:46
|
|
|
Battle of wits is obviously fine online, where it's just as easy to randomize 250 cards as it is in 60. The official stance on playing it in paper is that it's not reasonably possible to adequately randomize a deck of that size in the allotted time, effectively restricting it to MODO.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 18:40
|
|
|
Wait, since when has magic had a maximum deck size restriction?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 18:45
|
|
|
suicidesteve posted:There was a challenge to make the deck where you had to set up the slowest win possible. You could control all variables (ie you always choose the outcome of a coin flip, always draw the card you want) but you couldn't go infinite. It was a work of art. Yeah, that. I don't remember it in full, but the win condition was something ludicrous involving that goblin tribal enchantment that deals 1 damage whenever something dies. It required you to painstakingly slowly generate enough thrulls to kill your opponent, but the real kicker was that because of its diabolically awkward mana base, the only way to get to that point involved casting Beacon of Immortality something like 140 times. Targeting your opponent. With Hive Mind out. The result is that your opponent's life total scales exponentially into the stratosphere before you're ready to start the thrull-ping loop... and that loop scales linearly (and your mana base is still too awkward to allow more than like 1 damage a turn). I don't remember how, but they somehow threw in another exponent in there. So rather than taking a mere 2^140 (1e42 - already longer than the age of the universe if one turn takes one second) turns to win, you needed something like 2^(2^140) turns to do it. Which is a number so big it can't be represented directly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 18:45
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:Wait, since when has magic had a maximum deck size restriction? There technically isn't one, but there's a limit on shuffle time and a requirement that your deck is adequately randomized, and it becomes impossible to respect both once your deck is too big. e: though if we're being pedantic, there IS a limit- it's 4 times the number of distinct cards legal in your format plus the number of basic land cards in existence 
Starving Autist fucked around with this message at 18:51 on Nov 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 18:47
|
|
|
Ableist Kinkshamer posted:There technically isn't one all that needed to be said if a judge stops you from entering a tournament with a 250 card deck post it to reddit and they'll go to jail or something
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 18:50
|
|
|
Ableist Kinkshamer posted:There technically isn't one, but there's a limit on shuffle time and a requirement that your deck is adequately randomized, and it becomes impossible to respect both once your deck is too big. Right, so what's now the maximum deck size for sufficient human randomized action until it's too much? Or is this one of those BS rulings (just like the 4 horsemen one that led to this discussion) of "I know it when I see it" E: for the record 4 horsemen is the best deck next to the Thrull deck. Eggs comes at a distant third Chill la Chill fucked around with this message at 18:54 on Nov 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 18:51
|
|
|
Mortimer posted:all that needed to be said They can't stop you from entering, but they will definitely get you either for failure to sufficiently randomize or slow pay for taking too much time to shuffle.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 18:53
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:Right, so what's now the maximum deck size for sufficient human randomized action until it's too much? Or is this one of those BS rulings (just like the 4 horsemen one that led to this discussion) of "I know it when I see it" if {(([# of cards]^format) / size of dominant hand in inches) + [Judge's love of durdling]} >=1 , then you can play
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 18:54
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:Right, so what's now the maximum deck size for sufficient human randomized action until it's too much? Or is this one of those BS rulings (just like the 4 horsemen one that led to this discussion) of "I know it when I see it" Who knows? Maybe you have massive dextrous hands and can shuffle 250 cards like a wiz. Or maybe after you fumble for 5 minutes trying to shuffle 60 cards you get a penalty. I'd like to think you are just being an rear end in a top hat and know there isn't an answer to this question, but maybe you're just retarded. It depends but 60 cards is reasonable for most people, and 250 probably is not. I'd guess anything north of EDH deck size is probably pushing it, given they're a pain to shuffle.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 18:55
|
|
|
Why has no one made a mechanical card shuffler that works with sleeved cards?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 18:58
|
|
|
Entropic posted:Why has no one made a mechanical card shuffler that works with sleeved cards? Was literally about to post exactly this. This would not only make decks like BoW playable, it would speed up fetches/etc, AND eliminate all of the shuffle cheats we've seen recently.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 18:59
|
|
|
I guess in theory the machine could be rigged but that would be harder to do than manual shady shuffling.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 19:00
|
|
|
Ableist Kinkshamer posted:They can't stop you from entering, but they will definitely get you either for failure to sufficiently randomize or slow pay for taking too much time to shuffle. Tell em you have fibromyalgia and/or rheumatoid arthritis problem solved Anyone who says "yes I will be a magic judge who upholds the wizard laws no big decks" is a retard baby.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 19:00
|
|
|
Entropic posted:Why has no one made a mechanical card shuffler that works with sleeved cards? Is it possible to make a mechanical shuffler that never mangles a card?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 19:01
|
|
|
Entropic posted:Why has no one made a mechanical card shuffler that works with sleeved cards? Vegas card shufflers occasionally eat decks of cards, which is no problem when it's a blackjack deck but horrific if it had a bunch of dual lands.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 19:01
|
|
|
A shuffling machine would also have to have next to zero chance of mechanical failure because as soon as it gums up and shreds or creases a money card that poo poo's going out the window
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 19:02
|
|
|
Entropic posted:Why has no one made a mechanical card shuffler that works with sleeved cards? Because mechanical shufflers inevitably damage cards.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
Ableist Kinkshamer posted:e: though if we're being pedantic, there IS a limit- it's 4 times the number of distinct cards legal in your format plus the number of basic land cards in existence Shoot and this format allows Shadowborn Apostle and Relentless Rats.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
A mechanical shuffler could be designed for sleeved cards and have a bunch of saftey mechanisms to prevent mangled cards but it would probably shuffle only slightly faster than a player and cost twice as much as a normal one until it could be mass-marketed. That said, I'm surprised no-one has kickstarted one yet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 19:10
|
|
|
Thor-Stryker posted:A mechanical shuffler could be designed for sleeved cards and have a bunch of saftey mechanisms to prevent mangled cards but it would probably shuffle only slightly faster than a player and cost twice as much as a normal one until it could be mass-marketed. Magic is a pretty niche hobby. I can't see one that actually has to keep the cards pristine being cheap at all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 19:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 12:08 |
|
|
Mortimer posted:Tell em you have fibromyalgia and/or rheumatoid arthritis problem solved Anyone who says this is an idiot.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 19:16
|
|
