|
Chill la Chill posted:What's really gonna blow people's minds is when 2/<> becomes an optional cost. This, except unironically.
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 22:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 14:57 |
|
|
These last two pages.  Honestly, Wizards should have just kept the <> as an icon in mana costs, and left it as (1)/(2)/(3)/etc. in text boxes. Then there wouldn't be so much confusion between generic and colorless mana generation vs. payments.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
Lieutenant Centaur posted:It's starting to become clear now. So you can use 10 Wastes if you desire to cast New Kozy. Yeah, a Wastes is fundamentally identical to any other basic, except it taps for ◇ instead of W, U, B, R, or G, because it lacks the land types to do any of those things.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
Lieutenant Centaur posted:It's still really stupid and hopefully it's a set only thing. (It won't be) I think they expect new players to get it more easily and the older players to get it eventually. The potential to incentivise people moving away from homogeneous fetches and shocks mana bases is nice, and it could mean cool pushed artifacts/equipment later on if it's ongoing. I really doubt we'll be seeing many colourless things in places where they weren't going to be already, though. E: AlternateNu posted:These last two pages. Confusion for who? The colourless generic divide has been mentioned by Maro as a complexity issue. I kind of expect they'd be willing to confuse already committed players for a little while to make it easier on new players indefinitely. is that good fucked around with this message at 22:59 on Dec 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 22:55
|
|
|
Some Numbers posted:^^^^^: It's not a color! It further complicates the game for no real long term benefit. Like someone said before if you want to cast Ob Nix you need (3)BB it's still 5 no matter how you cut it UUUBB (for example). By now saying you can use Waste/Waste/Waste/BB you're still achieving basically the same outcome. Now you just have to further complicate things in your 60 card deck if you have say a total of 7 Diamond symbols in there, you now need to figure out how many additional wastes you need to run in your deck in addition to your already basic lands, manlands, whatever lands are in the format at that point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 22:56
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:This, except unironically. Same I can't believe how much trouble this is giving people. Even like Chapin on his podcast.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 22:57
|
|
|
Some Numbers posted:^^^^^: It's not a color! I think it's really stupid because it's a backdoor 6th color for bullshit reasons and fucks with templating with zero actual designspace gain that isn't a parasitic 6th color, and furthermore their marquee 6th color card is something that historically has not been a 6th color thing and that was the whole point of them. They're really loving up the "eldrazi are colorless in a land of colors!" theme with BFZ and now with new Kozilek.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:I think it's really stupid because it's a backdoor 6th color for bullshit reasons and fucks with templating with zero actual designspace gain that isn't a parasitic 6th color, and furthermore their marquee 6th color card is something that historically has not been a 6th color thing and that was the whole point of them. This is basically what I was trying to say with my last post. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
Allstone posted:and it could mean cool pushed artifacts/equipment later on if it's ongoing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:parasitic 6th color Also, do people not remember that a bunch of the eldrazi spells/drones were straight up colored the first time around? Devoid is just a way to do that while making "colorless matters" broad enough to actually function as a mechanic.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:00
|
|
|
Some Numbers posted:^^^^^: It's not a color! That's exactly what I mean, don't think of it as a sixth color for Converge and Sunburst, and don't count Waste as a 6th land type for Domain. If it works the way we think it does.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:00
|
|
|
Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:Someone, I think it was BJPaskoff, mentioned how Split Second's name is misleading. The biggest problem with Split Second is people assuming you can cast a split second card any time they can cast an Instant, even if the card is a Sorcery or an Enchantment without flash.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:I think it's really stupid because it's a backdoor 6th color for bullshit reasons and fucks with templating with zero actual designspace gain that isn't a parasitic 6th color, and furthermore their marquee 6th color card is something that historically has not been a 6th color thing and that was the whole point of them. How does it feel to be the old man that hates all change? The upside is pretty obvious - it allows them to print cards which work better in 2 or 3 color strategies than in 4c/5c ones, rather than just being assimilated into the Omnideck. A card that costs (for example) ◇BG is effectively a triple-color-cost card, without actually being three colors.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
I kinda want to go back to when Bestow was first spoiled because I'm pretty sure we had the same multi-page discussion of people sure nobody would ever understand it ever, which is a problem that will last the pre-release and maybe a draft or two.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:03
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:I think it's really stupid because it's a backdoor 6th color for bullshit reasons and fucks with templating with zero actual designspace gain that isn't a parasitic 6th color, and furthermore their marquee 6th color card is something that historically has not been a 6th color thing and that was the whole point of them. The design space can just be "this artifact would have been a {5} or else it would be too good and every deck would run it without any other changes so instead it's {1}{D}{D} and to run it you have to commit" odiv posted:They've already kind of had this opportunity for a while when they made artifacts that required coloured mana. I guess this is probably even more freeing though. Coloured artifacts bring in an extra frame, and they don't use them all the time (I think it was because they want to keep artifacts more different from enchantments?).
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:04
|
|
|
Look, I bounced your target so your spell fizzles. Why is that so hard to understand!?quote:Coloured artifacts bring in an extra frame, and they don't use them all the time (I think it was because they want to keep artifacts more different from enchantments?). Also, If you're running an artifact that costs WW, then you can run Path in modern and you don't have to worry about your manabase. If you're running one that costs two colourless then... Though I guess they don't really design with modern in mind, it's interesting. odiv fucked around with this message at 23:07 on Dec 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:04
|
|
|
Hey they weren't kidding, about this being a "Great Distortion" (of the rules, and peoples' commonly held assumptions and understandings, of them), huh
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:06
|
|
|
Lieutenant Centaur posted:It further complicates the game for no real long term benefit. I don't really think it futher complicates the game. Think of it as two parts: First: They are adding a colorless mana symbol. This is a sweeping change across all of magic Second: Special cards will require colorless mana in their costs. This is an OGW thing. The first one is about making the game more easy to learn. Now when you see that you have a card that costs {1} and a land that makes {R} and an artifact that makes {1}, you're inclined to think that you need to use the {1} to pay for the {1}, because that's how it works with other things. Changing this removes a special exception that you have to learn that this one symbol means two things in two different places. Now there's a symbol for each of them. The second one is just a minor thing that isn't really designed for long term benefit. It's just a thing that you can do now that you have the first.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:06
|
|
|
True colorless is a neat mechanic for Eldrazi, but I don't see it being evergreen. I think at most it'll be like hybrid mana and just used occasionally where it's needed. The more often it gets used in costing spells and abilities, the more it will feel like a permanent 6th color, which I would guess WotC wants to avoid. Changing colorless production to a unique icon is cool and probably helps understanding in the long run. It'll confuse people in the short run for sure though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:07
|
|
|
odiv posted:Look, I bounced your target so your spell fizzles. Why is that so hard to understand!? Removing fizzling is up there with removing the hand size rule for rules changes I want to and expect to see someday. All spells and abilities should resolve as much as they can, just like spells with multiple targets do when one target disappears.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:07
|
|
|
Entropic posted:The biggest problem with Split Second is people assuming you can cast a split second card any time they can cast an Instant, even if the card is a Sorcery or an Enchantment without flash. I think this comes from a deeper issue people have with understanding how spells work. They think of things in terms of "speed." An instant is faster than a sorcery, and an interrupt is faster than an instant.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:08
|
|
|
I wonder if they'll actually print a spreading seas equivalent of wastes. It'd fit thematically in the set, and was designed pretty much specifically to counteract greedy Jund manabases back in the day, yeah?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:10
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:This, except unironically. Same. Grogs are gonna be grogs when it comes to good design space that hasn't been used yet - at least in this game. Seriously guys it's as basic as wanting to have a <><> mana leak or having <>/(2) costs. It's not hard. Maybe it'll get people to play more colorless lands in modern. The colorless purchase and creation mismatch was something I struggled with early on. This just closes that hole.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:10
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:I think it's really stupid because it's a backdoor 6th color for bullshit reasons and fucks with templating with zero actual designspace gain that isn't a parasitic 6th color, and furthermore their marquee 6th color card is something that historically has not been a 6th color thing and that was the whole point of them. Wrong on all counts, congrats! It's in fact an elegant and clever way to solve multiple problems, remove a longstanding ambiguity, and deepen limited with no downside aside from, "we didn't used to have it," which is a meaningless argument applicable to literally anything new.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:11
|
|
|
Kalli posted:I wonder if they'll actually print a spreading seas equivalent of wastes. Waste Land confirmed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:11
|
|
|
If new Kozilek just said in the text box "At least two mana used to cast Kozilek must be colorless" would that be a dumb mechanic? I don't think so, and it certainly doesn't fit the definition of 'parasitic' I don't understand the criticism of this
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:17
|
|
|
stinkles1112 posted:If new Kozilek just said in the text box "At least two mana used to cast Kozilek must be colorless" would that be a dumb mechanic? I don't think so, and it certainly doesn't fit the definition of 'parasitic' It's new and therefore wrong and bad.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:18
|
|
|
stinkles1112 posted:I don't understand the criticism of this
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:19
|
|
|
Oh yeah I forgot what thread I was reading Edit: how do you type the little black diamond? sit on my Facebook fucked around with this message at 23:23 on Dec 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:19
|
|
|
I'm absolutely stunned that people cannot grasp that D must be payed with colorless mana. How is that difficult to grasp? That is literally the entire loving point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:25
|
|
|
stinkles1112 posted:Oh yeah I forgot what thread I was reading The unicode for it is & #9671; If you remove the space, you get ◇
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:25
|
|
|
Or you can hold ALT and hit 4 on your numpad.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:27
|
|
|
Niton posted:How does it feel to be the old man that hates all change? ♦BG is not cost-wise different than WBG, which is why I'm calling it a backdoor 6th color. It's exactly the same functionality as another color, and it's being done for bad reasons (supporting their bad colorless flavor for eldrazi this go around). A ♦BG card does not work better in a 2 color strategy than a 3 color strategy, it works in a different 3 color strategy. I don't think they're going to warp the game forever by making ♦ costs an evergreen and oft-used mechanic, because that just further cements it as a bad 6th color, but they're doing it for flavor reasons here and it is dumb as hell. Differentiating between colorless mana and generic mana costs is the sort of thing that bothers designers but not players because the difference has never once mattered until now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:28
|
|
|
Lieutenant Centaur posted:It's still really stupid and hopefully it's a set only thing. (It won't be) If they made a new kozilek thst just said in the text box 2 of the mana to cast him must be colorless and had a new land that tapped for (1) would it be stupid?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:34
|
|
|
I like the assertion that something is 'dumb' and 'bad' without actually stating what is dumb/bad about it. Please explain yourself instead of going on a rant. It totally is a backdoor 6th color, it just comes without any of the parasitism or demands for future printings that a 6th color would bring. They can bring this back or not as they will, because the only requirement for it, colorless mana, will remain a mainstay of Magic. It could only appear in this set and it'll still work fine. Sarmhan fucked around with this message at 23:40 on Dec 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:35
|
|
|
I can see it being like hybrid mana in that it's very low-impact in terms of comprehension complexity. But it does have less places where it can go, as it needs a lot more support from the set in order to work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:37
|
|
|
Oh neat I didn't think to use 🔷♦️🔶 symbol on my phone. Could even use ⤵️↪️↩️ for tap/untap.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:38
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:Removing fizzling is up there with removing the hand size rule for rules changes I want to and expect to see someday. All spells and abilities should resolve as much as they can, just like spells with multiple targets do when one target disappears. Spells with multiple targets don't fizzle when one of them is removed/becomes illegal. Only spells with a single target do.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:39
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:♦BG is not cost-wise different than WBG, which is why I'm calling it a backdoor 6th color. It's exactly the same functionality as another color, and it's being done for bad reasons (supporting their bad colorless flavor for eldrazi this go around). The WBG card can be cast off of a mana base consisting of Fetches and Shocklands, with a couple of basics of each type. The ♦BG card cannot. The fact that ♦ cannot be produced by fetchable duals is a very significant point, and not one that I expect to change at any time in the near future. Yes, the design space is obviously that of a sixth color, but a "sixth color" that doesn't use Fetchlands as part of its gameplan is a good thing for Magic.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 14:57 |
|
|
Cernunnos posted:Spells with multiple targets don't fizzle when one of them is removed/becomes illegal. Only spells with a single target fizzle when their target is removed. Yeah that's exactly what he was saying.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 23:40
|
|