|
GonSmithe posted:
Oh my god. I need to erase this from the internet so I don't have the conspiracy theorists having more ammo that some cards are "more rare" than others of the same rarity.
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 19:01 |
|
|
On the other hand this limited format could have a lot of ways to kill fliers and then most of your problems are solved. I really hate how frontloaded spoiler season is getting. Whiny dumb for things past but I sort of miss spoiler season being a bit sillier or being more about 'look at this silly thing I designed/developed'. Now it's just DO YOU WANNA BUY MAGIC CARDS? YES! YES? DRAGONS! I don't like how obvious the red bar is, even if I probably barely even count as a customer to WOTC now. Starving Autist posted:Teaser of one of the cards they're about to spoil at PAX
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
Spiderdrake posted:On the other hand this limited format could have a lot of ways to kill fliers and then most of your problems are solved. Yeah, sadly spoiler season is very much not aimed at Limited players.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
Spiderdrake posted:On the other hand this limited format could have a lot of ways to kill fliers and then most of your problems are solved. There could be a gold cycle at common too - there were common gold enemy-colored cards in FRF.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:There could be a gold cycle at common too - there were common gold enemy-colored cards in FRF. Those won't be DRAGONS though so they'll probably be lumped into the big dump at the end.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
Spiderdrake posted:On the other hand this limited format could have a lot of ways to kill fliers and then most of your problems are solved.  
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
Entropic posted:Those won't be DRAGONS though so they'll probably be lumped into the big dump at the end. Not being dragons means maybe they'd have some kind of inspired design.  Spiderdrake posted:On the other hand this limited format could have a lot of ways to kill fliers and then most of your problems are solved. If the level of removal turns out similar to KTK, the format will actually be completely miserable with as many rare bombs being spoiled as we've seen. Angry Grimace fucked around with this message at 18:54 on Mar 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 18:52
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:There could be a gold cycle at common too - there were common gold enemy-colored cards in FRF. Tell me more about your uncommon removal clearly aimed at constructed being relevant to the overarching limited environment, friend.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
WBJPaskoff posted:Oh my god. I need to erase this from the internet so I don't have the conspiracy theorists having more ammo that some cards are "more rare" than others of the same rarity. why, because it clearly shows it?
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
GonSmithe posted:
I made it big, and as I scrolled down 4 times expecting the image to end, there arose a new row of Rally The Ancestors.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
Isn't that just an error with the printing process though much the same way there ended up being boxes of FRF where every single land was a fetch.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 19:33
|
|
|
The card should have read: Flying Prowess Prowess
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 19:36
|
|
|
The thing I love about this card is that it means anyone who ever designed a fake card with Prowess, Prowess was wrong... It's the little things.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 19:36
|
|
|
I wonder why they didn't just give it Prowess 2. I guess it's cuz prowess isn't in DTK, but variable Prowess would have been cool.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 19:36
|
|
|
Cactrot posted:The card should have read: I love how they've removed prowess in name only.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 19:37
|
|
|
Zoness posted:I wonder why they didn't just give it Prowess 2. I guess it's cuz prowess isn't in DTK, but variable Prowess would have been cool. I believe Maro said they just didn't think it would be terribly worth it to have a number because so few creatures would ever have more than 1 (likely because it might get busted by spamming cheapo spells) The reason it still has Prowess is because they obviously like Prowess as the Monk-ability and didn't want to really get rid of it, they just had to for stupid timey-wimey reasons. So Ojutai's actual clan ability is fake prowess and recycled prowess enabler mechanic. Angry Grimace fucked around with this message at 19:43 on Mar 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
Look man I just want a card with Prowess X where X is the number of noncreature spells cast this turn. Also I just think parameterized mechanics are cool, whoops i confused that with variable cycling costs!! Zoness fucked around with this message at 19:51 on Mar 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 19:43
|
|
|
Zoness posted:like when they added a number to scry (and when that number isn't 1) That was always there?
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:That was always there? i think i remember reading in development that it wasn't. but also scry wasn't always a thing that was read as a sentence thing thats actually what im thinking of also the actual thing i got it mixed up with was cycling costing 2 always in urzas but then they added variable costs to it (not that it was implicitly 2 then) I want to think there was something that wasn't parameterized at one point and then was but I can't remember if theres actually a thing like that now Zoness fucked around with this message at 19:54 on Mar 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
Zoness posted:Also I just think parameterized mechanics are cool, like when they added a number to scry (and when that number isn't 1) Scry's first appearance was in Fifth Dawn and it was Scry 2 across the board. Future Sight is where they started tinkering with the number.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
Zoness posted:Look man I just want a card with Prowess X where X is the number of noncreature spells cast this turn.  I don't see much reason in not having parameters in mechanics, where they'd be appropriate. I asked MaRo if Mega morph N was considered but I don't know if he answered And your Prowess X idea is cool. Edit2: also interesting is Echo, which changed to Echo [cost] and is much more deep Serperoth fucked around with this message at 20:00 on Mar 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 19:54
|
|
|
Some Numbers posted:Scry's first appearance was in Fifth Dawn and it was Scry 2 across the board. That's kinda funny.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 19:56
|
|
|
Zoness posted:i think i remember reading in development that it wasn't. but also scry wasn't always a thing that was read as a sentence thing thats actually what im thinking of Echo. Echo used to just be "Echo" and the cost was the card's cost.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 19:56
|
|
|
Zoness posted:I want to think there was something that wasn't parameterized at one point and then was but I can't remember if theres actually a thing like that now I guess echo falls into that category, it used to be that the echo cost was always the mana cost by default.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 19:57
|
|
|
Can we get prowess as evergreen, it is a great mechanic for blue to use so it actually has a creature keyword other than flying.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 19:57
|
|
|
LordSaturn posted:Echo. Echo used to just be "Echo" and the cost was the card's cost. Starving Autist posted:I guess echo falls into that category, it used to be that the echo cost was always the mana cost by default. I had to quote both of these because it's in flavor but thanks that was bothering me cuz I knew they hosed with it in time spiral block.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 19:59
|
|
|
As long as this is the only UU card in standard, http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=378416 Mono U Devotion is dead.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
Madmarker posted:Can we get prowess as evergreen, it is a great mechanic for blue to use so it actually has a creature keyword other than flying. Maro likes the idea of doing that, someone asked on his blog recently. Angry Grimace fucked around with this message at 20:05 on Mar 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
Big Ol Marsh Pussy posted:the problem with the dragonlords is the best use for those spots is to be big dumb edh cards but they aren't even really interesting to be your commander. like with silumgar, i like sower of temptation, but i've never said "gee, i wish sower could be my commander" If you don't see the value in a giant uncounterable Grand Abolisher with two keywords I think you just lack imagination.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
Silumgar seems like the most fun on in EDH, but then again, I don't know, I don't play sucky formats. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:Silumgar seems like the most fun on in EDH, but then again, I don't know, I don't play sucky formats. Silumgar is standard playable. I could see him as a SB card for control decks after they board out some number of removal slots. Sower of Temption has been good in every format it's available in.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 20:12
|
|
|
i was already thinking of turning my Swan Lake EDH deck into an interpretative dance one and i think this pushes it over the edge edit: lets not forget Stratus Dancer too RME fucked around with this message at 20:26 on Mar 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 20:18
|
|
|
Cactrot posted:The card should have read: That's obviously way too powerful, a Stifle can't get both of those triggers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 20:21
|
|
|
I'm happy Ultimate Price is getting reprinted because it kills everything in the R/W Aggro and G-Devotion decks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
PAX east panel starting in 30 min.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
moxiemag posted:PAX east panel starting in 30 min. Finally, we can complete the megacycle of overcosted fatties.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 20:33
|
|
|
Chamale posted:That's obviously way too powerful, a Stifle can't get both of those triggers. Are there spells that care about exact power/toughness? With 2 separate prowess triggers, you could kill a Prowess, Prowess 4/4 with a spell that said "Destroy target creature with 5 toughness", but the Prowess 2 creature dodges it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 20:34
|
|
|
LordSaturn posted:Echo. Echo used to just be "Echo" and the cost was the card's cost. I remember reading a retrospective on Time Spiral, and they considered that change a mistake.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 20:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 19:01 |
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:Finally, we can complete the megacycle of overcosted fatties. Plus fetches, obv Applebees posted:I remember reading a retrospective on Time Spiral, and they considered that change a mistake. Interesting. Remember why? (unnecessary complexity?)
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2015 20:35
|
|