|
Zoness posted:isn't the idea that people like kicker but x or kicker with x like a sign that kicker worked really well
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 17:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 05:17 |
|
|
I am really going to miss scry lands. 
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 17:39
|
|
|
They should definitely just drop landwalk because it's just a variant of "can't be blocked if" which they've already decided isn't worth keywording on its own. Intimidate could go for similar reasons. I don't mind them existing, I think the interaction with stuff like Cairn Wanderer is cool. But I just looked, and Soulflayer doesn't copy landwalk, intimidate, or protection whereas Cairn Wanderer does copy landwalk, protection and fear (they didn't use intimidate yet). Maybe that is a sign they're doing away with those, or maybe they just decided there wasn't room on the card/they weren't important enough.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
Serperoth posted:I don't like Intimidate, it feels very narrow (liked Fear better too), but Fight has the exact issue you mentioned, it's barely there. Cycling and Kicker have 160+ and 110+ cards each, and they're both much better mechanics than "alright". Drop Landwalk, drop Regeneration, put in two of Cycling/Scry/Kicker. the reason i like intimidate is that it gives black and red evasion in a way I like, from flavor and mechanical standpoints. I would love for Scry/Cycling to be evergreen personally, that kind of card draw smoothing is really nice to have around.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 17:46
|
|
|
Zoness posted:lol if you picked that theme out .... yes?! It's not like we're making articles to sell anything. Trilas posted:
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 17:54
|
|
|
Serperoth posted:I don't like Intimidate, it feels very narrow (liked Fear better too), but Fight has the exact issue you mentioned, it's barely there. Cycling and Kicker have 160+ and 110+ cards each, and they're both much better mechanics than "alright". Drop Landwalk, drop Regeneration, put in two of Cycling/Scry/Kicker. Intimidate's issue is that its just randomly good based on deck color, which isn't something you can do much about (every color can deal with, for example, opposing creatures with flying if they prepare for it). It gets worse when that mechanic is put on something playable to begin with, like Lifebane Zombie.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 17:57
|
|
|
Serperoth posted:I don't like Intimidate, it feels very narrow (liked Fear better too), but Fight has the exact issue you mentioned, it's barely there. Cycling and Kicker have 160+ and 110+ cards each, and they're both much better mechanics than "alright". Drop Landwalk, drop Regeneration, put in two of Cycling/Scry/Kicker. Intimidate is by definition way less narrow. It's also a really good mechanic for limited. They have really ramped up the pseudo evasion that red creatures get in general with goblin-war-drum and intimidate for limited so i welcome it. That said, I also sort of miss fear. I just liked when black had an answer for everything except artifacts and other black creatures i.e. terror and so on. Fear is also a lot more flavorful I think. I'd love for scry to be evergreen. Everything else, eh
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:.... yes?! It's not like we're making articles to sell anything. lmao why would you keep posting about this
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
Liberal application of Scry 1 was more or less the best thing about Theros. A small thing, but one that helps fight screw/flood, generates a new, relevant decision to make, and pushes the power of the cards with it just a bit when necessary. Loved it as a limited player.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 18:04
|
|
|
I like the way LSV is doing his MM2015 reviews. He basically lists the cards are "Power cards," in a specific color where if you're playing White, you should always take these cards, and the "Synergy" where he lists the cards as stuff you'd want if you're in a very specific deck type. Also, since O-Ring is on his review list, he immediately linked to the video of him breaking MODO. For value.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
is this your arm
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 18:15
|
|
|
Lol no. But it is a teammate.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 18:21
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:Lol no. But it is a teammate. LOL! Trolled!!!!!!
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 18:25
|
|
|
Sickening posted:I am really going to miss scry lands. I'm not, god drat does playing with those feel awful
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:.... yes?! It's not like we're making articles to sell anything. Your article is lovely and you should feel lovely, I hth
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
TheKingofSprings posted:I'm not, god drat does playing with those feel awful Huh? There are certain situations where the are more powerful than straight up duals. But then again I cast the card "Courser of Kurphix" alot.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 18:39
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:Lol no. But it is a teammate. I don't believe you.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 18:44
|
|
|
Serperoth posted:I don't like Intimidate, it feels very narrow (liked Fear better too), but Fight has the exact issue you mentioned, it's barely there. Cycling and Kicker have 160+ and 110+ cards each, and they're both much better mechanics than "alright". Drop Landwalk, drop Regeneration, put in two of Cycling/Scry/Kicker. Fight has been in every set since it was introduced; it's a staple effect and keywording it saves quite a bit of wording. I personally think that Threaten effects should be keyworded for the same reasons. Anyway, it's not really fair to compare the number of cards using a recent mechanic that is primary in one colour and secondary in another to old ones that can be in any colour. Kicker will never be evergreen because it's too generic; they've done plenty of mechanics that are variants of kicker, but not using kicker meant they could tie them together thematically, and with stuff like entwine the wording would be more awkward if it was just kicker. I think the issue with scry and cycling is they are both low-flavour mechanics with very similar goals; if you have access to both at all times it's not clear when you should use one or the other. I do agree though that there should be mechanics that can just show up without being major themes; especially with core sets going away, it would make reprints easier.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 18:52
|
|
|
loving lol
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 18:55
|
|
|
I'm fine with Scry being a sometimes mechanic. Remember pro tour journey into nyx, where half the decisions that were being made were done in a place that spectators couldn't see? Imagine that happening all the time in standard because Scry is in every set. I guess if it's evergreen it won't be used as much as it was in Theros but then it probably wouldn't show up outside of blue and maybe one other color.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 18:56
|
|
|
Sickening posted:I don't believe you.  Come have a beer with me at GP Vegas
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
Kabanaw posted:I'm fine with Scry being a sometimes mechanic. Remember pro tour journey into nyx, where half the decisions that were being made were done in a place that spectators couldn't see? Imagine that happening all the time in standard because Scry is in every set. I guess if it's evergreen it won't be used as much as it was in Theros but then it probably wouldn't show up outside of blue and maybe one other color. As a player, I find those kind of decisions regarding cards to keep and bottom, what order to stack Ponder cards and what cards to put back with Brainstorm. are some of the most enjoyable ones to make. Filtering owns, I would really love to see more of those kinds of effects.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 19:04
|
|
|
Barry Shitpeas posted:I do agree though that there should be mechanics that can just show up without being major themes; especially with core sets going away, it would make reprints easier. This is closer to what I think, actually. A small pool of mechanics that just show up if needed, but they're not major themes. Maybe just Scry and Cycling, possibly with another draw-fixing one.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 19:05
|
|
|
Bread Set Jettison posted:Intimidate is by definition way less narrow. It's also a really good mechanic for limited. They have really ramped up the pseudo evasion that red creatures get in general with goblin-war-drum and intimidate for limited so i welcome it. My biggest problem with Intimidate is that it'd be a much more flavorful keyword name for the "creatures with power less than ~'s power can't block it" effect than the color-based thing it actually is. Fear made more sense, but it's much less resonant that a giant green creature feels intimidated by an Academy Raider. The way it's worded also makes it worse on multicolored creatures than monocolored, which I guess is an interesting wrinkle, but just feels odd. E: Just to be clear, I agree with your assessment of it mechanically, and I really like it in limited as well, especially as an evasion tool for red. It just lacks a bit in the flavor/resonance department for me.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
so how many interesting things have you had to say in your life, cml?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 19:18
|
|
|
Serperoth posted:This is closer to what I think, actually. A small pool of mechanics that just show up if needed, but they're not major themes. Maybe just Scry and Cycling, possibly with another draw-fixing one.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
TheKingofSprings posted:As a player, I find those kind of decisions regarding cards to keep and bottom, what order to stack Ponder cards and what cards to put back with Brainstorm. are some of the most enjoyable ones to make. I personally find it boring when my opponent spends a minute deciding what to do with cards I can't see and the end result nets me no more information than "they might draw a card they want" or "they will definitely draw a card they want" too often. It's interesting up to a point to determine why they chose what they did but without any other information there's only so much you can glean. There needs to be filtering, deck manipulation, etc, because people like it and it helps make the game work, but I prefer when it yields some public information (cards discarded, revealed, exiled, or on the battlefield) which scry does not.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 19:37
|
|
|
Cunso posted:There actually already is a pool like this for things like hybrid. Maro calls them deciduous mechanics. I'm aware, but it's not really an official thing, is it? What I mean is mechanics that aren't evergreen, are used as they should (deciduous, basically), but don't count against the number/complexity of mechanics in the set, just like evergreen ones do. Call them "tools" or something, or at least codify the deciduous-ness of them in that sense.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 19:50
|
|
|
quote:Followed by Tom Ross, Paul Rietzl, Jonathon Loucks and 48 others. Heh
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 19:53
|
|
|
what's the joke here
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 19:59
|
|
|
Serperoth posted:I'm aware, but it's not really an official thing, is it? What I mean is mechanics that aren't evergreen, are used as they should (deciduous, basically), but don't count against the number/complexity of mechanics in the set, just like evergreen ones do. Call them "tools" or something, or at least codify the deciduous-ness of them in that sense. The thing is, he's not being really clear on what a "deciduous mechanic" is. Its basically just hybrid mana and -1/-1 counters as far as I can tell. He already clarified that stuff that comes back a lot, e.g. Cycling or Flashback, aren't deciduous. They aren't really "mechanics" the way most of us think of them, really. As for the Angry Pro Tour guy, you know what's up when you realize the worst thing that could have happened to him is that people read his lovely articles. Angry Grimace fucked around with this message at 20:04 on May 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
AgentSythe posted:what's the joke here I'm not sure there is one.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:The thing is, he's not being really clear on what a "deciduous mechanic" is. Its basically just hybrid mana and -1/-1 counters. That's why I want them codified, pretty much. "These are mechanics we will use, without digging into actual mechanic space for the entire set, to support it" sorta.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:I'm not sure there is one. Heh
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:The thing is, he's not being really clear on what a "deciduous mechanic" is. Its basically just hybrid mana and -1/-1 counters as far as I can tell. Even calling -1/-1 counters a distinct "mechanic" is really stretching it IMO, except in the very weak sense that everything is technically a mechanic, like direct damage and power/toughness boosts are mechanics. The reason why -1/-1 counters aren't in every set/block is, IIRC, basically just because they've decided that having them and +1/+1 counters in the same draft environment is too complex, which it really hasn't been since they made them cancel each other out but whatevs. I'm not really trying to pick a bone with your statement, by the way. If anything I think I'm agreeing with you that they aren't really mechanics, they're some vague category that might in some discursive context be useful for talking about things but anything written by Maro probably isn't it.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 20:26
|
|
|
aren't -1/-1 counters a thing that accompany wither or infect or persist basically although shadowmoor had cards that could -1/-1 counter themselves for an untap so that was independent of keywords i guess i would have considered -1/-1 counters a theme rather than mechanic tho i guess Zoness fucked around with this message at 20:33 on May 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:The thing is, he's not being really clear on what a "deciduous mechanic" is. Its basically just hybrid mana and -1/-1 counters as far as I can tell. He already clarified that stuff that comes back a lot, e.g. Cycling or Flashback, aren't deciduous. They aren't really "mechanics" the way most of us think of them, really. I would consider colored artifacts in that category. (Alara, New Phyerixa, Theros)
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 20:38
|
|
|
Zoness posted:isn't the idea that people like kicker but x or kicker with x like a sign that kicker worked really well Yeah kicker is a really good concept, so good in fact, that rather than having kicker reprinted everywhere, they just come up with mechanics which are variations or restrictions on kicker so that they can have shiny new mechanics and/or a more unified mechanical identity. Serperoth posted:I'm aware, but it's not really an official thing, is it? What I mean is mechanics that aren't evergreen, are used as they should (deciduous, basically), but don't count against the number/complexity of mechanics in the set, just like evergreen ones do. Call them "tools" or something, or at least codify the deciduous-ness of them in that sense. What's the purpose of codifying this? Whether they count towards the complexity of a set isn't really something for wizards to decide. I mean, NWO is a codification of complexity but it's something that's constantly in flux, and the rules keep changing. It also only applies to one part of the design. Set-level complexity decisions don't really have any hard and fast rules about what they can do. They have general ideas about how many mechanics a set can support, but there's no rule they follow that says that if they add a mechanic they have to take one out. Hybrid mana could have minimal impact on the complexity of the set, as in FRF, and it could have a more significant impact, like in ARB. The idea is just that it's a mechanic which has lesser impact but isn't exactly "free." JerryLee posted:The reason why -1/-1 counters aren't in every set/block is, IIRC, basically just because they've decided that having them and +1/+1 counters in the same draft environment is too complex, which it really hasn't been since they made them cancel each other out but whatevs. The issue is with people putting dice on things and then forgetting what kind of counter it's meant to be, not with having two different kinds of counters on something. Which is also kinda whatever.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:The reason why -1/-1 counters aren't in every set/block is, IIRC, basically just because they've decided that having them and +1/+1 counters in the same draft environment is too complex, which it really hasn't been since they made them cancel each other out but whatevs. A rule that is inferred nowhere on the cards and can cause things to interact weirdly and unintuitively. On the surface it looks like both counters can exist and for most situations it wouldn't matter because having 4 +1/+1 counters and 3 -1/-1 counters is a net +1/+1 and the Chameleon Colossus is still 5/5. It's when it's combined with caring about counters beyond the raw P/T that we get into things that aren't obvious.   A Furystoke Giant that comes back from Presist while a Bramblewood Paragon is present would still be a 3/3. But it won't have trample and can in fact persist again. It'd be worse if Scars block had both counters, because there were cards that could manipulate specific amounts of counters without touching other ones.  
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 05:17 |
|
|
Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:A rule that is inferred nowhere on the cards and can cause things to interact weirdly and unintuitively. I mean sure but the legendary supertype can also be called this so I mean like how is this a problem. Like there's just parts of the game that will require rules checks and that's what judges are for. But I mean counters cancelling each other tends to feel right after it's been explained. Zoness fucked around with this message at 20:52 on May 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 20:49
|
|