Magic the Gathering Appreciation Station

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > Magic the Gathering Appreciation Station

«‹›1715 »

Hellsau: Jan 14, 2010; NEVER FUCKING TAKE A NIGHT OFF CLAN WARS.

Ramos posted:

I still pine for comments.

It is totally embarassing that comments have been broken for like three years.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 17:58

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 24, 2024 18:14

mandatory lesbian: Dec 18, 2012

Barry Shitpeas posted:

Maro's column is like the only one worth reading outside of previews, what are you talking about

this

# ? Jan 11, 2016 18:17

Entropic: Feb 21, 2007; patriarchy sucks

Hellsau posted:

It is totally embarassing that comments have been broken for like three years.

On Gatherer? The card rating is still broken too, right?

# ? Jan 11, 2016 18:20

Lancelot: May 23, 2006; Fun Shoe

Hellsau posted:

They got rid of their forums because they can just use Reddit (even though it can't be much effort to maintain the MTG forums) so getting rid of their columns and relying on SCG and ChannelFireball for promotion is the next logical step. Presumably they'll shut down Gatherer and just use magiccards.info for oracle text.

They got rid of their forums because of about seven or eight different apocalyptic meltdowns which a saner company could have avoided. At one point the WotC forums (including D&D) were one of the biggest forums in the world. They proceeded to gently caress that up by:

Migrating everyone from normal vB forums to "Gleemax", Randy's abysmal attempt at making WotC a social media platform for games. This had half-hearted options for blog posts and groups that they never fully implemented and abandoned pretty quickly.
Firing all the volunteer moderators ("WizO"s), who were posters in the forums and consequently had a lot of community buy-in. They replaced these with VRCs, like the MODO moderators, who were paid employees of WotC who were contractually prohibited from talking about the reasons behind their moderation decisions. This lead to several high-profile misogynistic harassers never getting banned and lots of female members leaving.
Transfering all the forums from wizards.com/forums to forums.wizards.com without leaving up any redirects, permanently breaking all existing hotlinks.
As one of the largest vB boards in the world, when WotC's contract came up for renewal, vB asked for more money. Since asking WotC to pay money for a digital product is like asking a teenager to pay for music, they cancelled their contract and announced a transfer within two weeks to a new platform. Turns out this new platform was a blogging platform rather than forums software and so looked abysmal. I think at this point they were down from millions of users to thousands.

Barry Shitpeas posted:

Maro's column is like the only one worth reading outside of previews, what are you talking about

he's somehow deluded himself into thinking he is a half-philosopher, half-author genius. his articles read like every time he sits down to write he reaches into a bag and pulls out three pieces of paper on which are written things like "invent a new jargon word for something people already do", "retell a story about R&D that makes it look like you were right all along", "write this entire article as if you were the magic card and were being drawn in a player's opening hand!"

# ? Jan 11, 2016 18:22

Ramos: Jul 3, 2012

Entropic posted:

On Gatherer? The card rating is still broken too, right?

That implies you have some reason to believe Wizards may have done something by now to fix the ratings.

Lancelot posted:

Firing all the volunteer moderators ("WizO"s), who were posters in the forums and consequently had a lot of community buy-in. They replaced these with VRCs, like the MODO moderators, who were paid employees of WotC who were contractually prohibited from talking about the reasons behind their moderation decisions. This lead to several high-profile misogynistic harassers never getting banned and lots of female members leaving.

Of all the loving things, this is like Running a Community 101. Sheesh, this wasn't even a technological issue, this was just straight up being blind to the internet.

Ramos fucked around with this message at 18:29 on Jan 11, 2016

# ? Jan 11, 2016 18:24

Entropic: Feb 21, 2007; patriarchy sucks

Remember when they first did the update to gatherer and the 'next page' button in search results was hidden by bad CSS design? I think that's the only think they actually fixed.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 18:29

black potus: Jul 13, 2006

today i therapied naming Jareth but all they had was Goblin Kings :smith:

# ? Jan 11, 2016 19:48

Madmarker: Jan 7, 2007

black potus posted:

today i therapied naming Jareth but all they had was Goblin Kings

too soon

# ? Jan 11, 2016 19:49

Anil Dikshit: Apr 11, 2007

black potus posted:

today i therapied naming Jareth but all they had was Goblin Kings

gently caress you, too soon, bro.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 20:08

TheKingofSprings: Oct 9, 2012

I know this is David Bowie but I don't get the joke

# ? Jan 11, 2016 20:15

Madmarker: Jan 7, 2007

TheKingofSprings posted:

I know this is David Bowie but I don't get the joke

Jareth was the name of his character in Labyrinth, Jareth was the Goblin King

Jareth, Leonin Titan is a magic card as is Goblin King

# ? Jan 11, 2016 20:17

black potus: Jul 13, 2006

hey man it was an homage hence the smith :mad:

# ? Jan 11, 2016 20:55

Zoness: Jul 24, 2011; Talk to the hand.; Grimey Drawer

Barry Shitpeas posted:

Maro's column is like the only one worth reading outside of previews, what are you talking about

Just because it's better than the rest of the dreck doesn't mean it's actually good.

Also that's really rude to the lsv article.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 20:56

Madmarker: Jan 7, 2007

black potus posted:

hey man it was an homage hence the smith

sorry, your humor was to labyrinthine for me to get.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 20:57

black potus: Jul 13, 2006

Madmarker posted:

sorry, your humor was to labyrinthine for me to get.

the spirit of the joke is important

# ? Jan 11, 2016 20:59

Voyager I: Jun 29, 2012; This is how your posting feels.
🐥🐥🐥🐥🐥

black potus posted:

the spirit of the joke is important

Nothing can wash off the stench of your posting.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 21:02

MiddleEastBeast: Jan 19, 2003; Forum Bully

Angry Grimace posted:

The whole argument "well you gotta do anything to win" is one of those eye-rolling arguments where it doesn't actually extend to everything despite everyone acting like it does, e.g. monitoring what cards opposing teams are ordering (which isn't actually illegal) and doesn't actually apply to lots of things despite people saying it does. The George Brett incident is notable because its an outlier, the same way you don't see people arguing that guys don't run up the first base line in the runners box even though technically you are out if you run outside of it and there's a loving lot more money on the line. Golfers literally call penalties on themselves.

I mean, if you really want to win by grinding out those type of advantages then at least have the decency to not also claim the moral high ground and just admit you don't give a gently caress as long as you win.

Sorry to keep beating this into the ground, but it's funny you're saying this since like a year ago we got into a huge argument here specifically because you claimed to not view that guy who was spying on other players' purchases for a PT or GP as being scummy at all, simply because the act wasn't against the rules so it was a "do anything it takes to win" sorta deal and by definition can't be scummy if it's within the rules.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 21:08

Ramos: Jul 3, 2012

black potus posted:

the spirit of the joke is important

Dull, unfunny, edgy, and poorly timed. It's you in joke form.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 21:14

Zoness: Jul 24, 2011; Talk to the hand.; Grimey Drawer

black potus posted:

today i therapied naming Jareth but all they had was Goblin Kings

Which one is playable in the format though

Zoness fucked around with this message at 21:35 on Jan 11, 2016

# ? Jan 11, 2016 21:31

mcmagic: Jul 1, 2004; If you see this avatar while scrolling the succ zone, you have been visited by the mcmagic of shitty lib takes! Good luck and prosperity will come to you, but only if you reply "shut the fuck up mcmagic" to this post!

2 more copies of Painful Truths in the SCG PIQ Legacy Top 8.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 21:40

Zoness: Jul 24, 2011; Talk to the hand.; Grimey Drawer

Which PIQ is this?

# ? Jan 11, 2016 21:46

black potus: Jul 13, 2006

mcmagic posted:

2 more copies of Painful Truths in the SCG PIQ Legacy Top 8.

cite plz

e: also the other one bc i can't find any of this poo poo

# ? Jan 11, 2016 21:46

MiddleEastBeast: Jan 19, 2003; Forum Bully

black potus posted:

cite plz

e: also the other one bc i can't find any of this poo poo

Here's one from the other weekend:

http://magic.tcgplayer.com/db/deck.asp?deck_id=1257162

edit: here

http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=97575

# ? Jan 11, 2016 21:50

Some Numbers: Sep 28, 2006; "LET'S GET DOWN TO WORK!!"

Does one copy in the sideboard really count?

# ? Jan 11, 2016 21:52

Voyager I: Jun 29, 2012; This is how your posting feels.
🐥🐥🐥🐥🐥

Sickening posted:

He ended up winning his match with his "gotcha". To be fair he was on a 2 turn clock anyway with his opponent in top deck mode and was going to win anyway.

No he wasn't. He had to sacrifice his creature at the end of the turn and was basically reduced to playing a really lovely reanimator deck.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 21:56

black potus: Jul 13, 2006

one counts, but it's 5 decks in 3 months:

black potus posted:

MCMAGIC: are you comfortable calling FIVE (5) top 8 decks featuring Painful Truths in the next THREE (3) months, by March 8th, 2016 Anno Domini in ONE HUNDRED PLUS (this gimmick is hard, 100+) person events success in legacy for the purposes of our bet?

so by my count we're at 2/5

also my understanding was my stakes were posting with proper punc/caps/grammar forever more vs mcmagic playing a chamale brew and posting a report.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 21:57

Orange Fluffy Sheep: Jul 26, 2008; Bad EXP received

Some Numbers posted:

Does one copy in the sideboard really count?

The literal text of the bet was

black potus posted:

MCMAGIC: are you comfortable calling FIVE (5) top 8 decks featuring Painful Truths in the next THREE (3) months, by March 8th, 2016 Anno Domini in ONE HUNDRED PLUS (this gimmick is hard, 100+) person events success in legacy for the purposes of our bet?

It's a top 8 deck featuring Painful Truths in a 100+ person Legacy event. 5th place has 2 of them.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 21:58

Death Bot: Mar 4, 2007; Binary killing machines, turning 1 into 0 since 0011000100111001 0011011100110110

Some Numbers posted:

Does one copy in the sideboard really count?

Yes, and that's exactly why the number wasn't one because "I bet that reasonably good card won't accidentally show up in one sideboard" is a fool's bet

# ? Jan 11, 2016 21:59

MiddleEastBeast: Jan 19, 2003; Forum Bully

I woulda preferred mcmagic being held to never using ellipses again...

# ? Jan 11, 2016 21:59

Zoness: Jul 24, 2011; Talk to the hand.; Grimey Drawer

MiddleEastBeast posted:

I woulda preferred mcmagic being held to never using ellipses again...

I believe he rejected that as a loss penalty in the bet.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 22:05

suicidesteve: Jan 4, 2006; "Life is a maze. This is one of its dead ends.

Zoness posted:

I believe he rejected that as a loss penalty in the bet.

That was the first condition to the bet but he rejected it.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 22:10

Barry Shitpeas: Dec 17, 2003; there is no need
to be upset

Winner POTM July 2013

Zoness posted:

Just because it's better than the rest of the dreck doesn't mean it's actually good.

Also that's really rude to the lsv article.

I like LSV's articles but they tend to either be decks that have been written about in greater detail elsewhere, or lower-tier decks with his pet card of the moment

Anyway, Maro's experiments with literary form and suchlike tend to fall flat, but he does have a good understanding of game design and he is very open about the game's design philosophy and process.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 22:14

PleasantDirge: Sep 7, 2009; ASK ME ABOUT HOW NOT BEING A FUCKING ASSHOLE ON THE ROAD IS JUST LIKE BEING A JEW AT A NAZI GATHERING BECAUSE I CAN NOT UNDERSTAND HOW TO NOT BE A FUCKING ASSHOLE AND WHEN PEOPLE TREAT ME LIKE I'M A FUCKING ASSHOLE THAT IS JUST LIKE GENOCIDE

Ramos posted:

Dull, unfunny, edgy, and poorly timed. It's you in joke form.

I can't believe anyone thinks that about potus or potus' posting.

We make 9-11 jokes on 9-12 here so maybe find a different place to clutch your bowie pearls if you want hugs? I still think you're swell though.

Re: scumbagchat, it's not a needle problem. It's a "how to name a card" problem because when you can get away with "that big rear end R/G dude what throws lands for DMG" and be considered to have named a legal card the issue is not "nit picky minutia filled bullshit rules" it's "dudebro didn't do his homework" problem so hard cheese for him. The rule is as forgiving as it can be with leaving minimal room for shenanigans.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 22:34

Serperoth: Feb 21, 2013

So a video came out where a teammate/friend/something of Needle Guy claims that the named card was "borborygmos, the one in your deck" and implies that the Judges were his friends and all that. Is that the first time we hear of that? Cause the story that I knew up to now was "He called a Judge, and named plain Borborygmos". Can someone confirm/deny?

# ? Jan 11, 2016 22:37

Zoness: Jul 24, 2011; Talk to the hand.; Grimey Drawer

Realistically everyone should know the name of every card from Ravnica block because RGD limited was the (now third, not counting MMA's) best.

I'm going to Helium Squirter your Vigean Hydropon and then activate Selesnya Evangel and Elvish Skysweeper to kill it.

Zoness fucked around with this message at 22:44 on Jan 11, 2016

# ? Jan 11, 2016 22:42

Voyager I: Jun 29, 2012; This is how your posting feels.
🐥🐥🐥🐥🐥

PleasantDirge posted:

Re: scumbagchat, it's not a needle problem. It's a "how to name a card" problem because when you can get away with "that big rear end R/G dude what throws lands for DMG" and be considered to have named a legal card the issue is not "nit picky minutia filled bullshit rules" it's "dudebro didn't do his homework" problem so hard cheese for him. The rule is as forgiving as it can be with leaving minimal room for shenanigans.

I think the general permissiveness with naming contributes to the problem. Usually even the vaguest description is good enough, so if you don't know that some obscure card actually has another, even more obscure card from ten years ago with an overlapping name, there's no reason to expect so much precision to suddenly be necessary to not get rules lawyered.

Again, I understand that the Judges did their jobs and interpreted the rules correctly, but what the situation actually reflects is an undesirable snag in the current rules and not something we should pretend is somehow a good outcome. In general, I'd say that in situations where ambiguity exists, the desirable outcome would be to clarify that ambiguity before proceeding to adjudication.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 22:48

MiddleEastBeast: Jan 19, 2003; Forum Bully

Voyager I posted:

I think the general permissiveness with naming contributes to the problem. Usually even the vaguest description is good enough, so if you don't know that some obscure card actually has another, even more obscure card from ten years ago with an overlapping name, there's no reason to expect so much precision to suddenly be necessary to not get rules lawyered.

Again, I understand that the Judges did their jobs and interpreted the rules correctly, but what the situation actually reflects is an undesirable snag in the current rules and not something we should pretend is somehow a good outcome. In general, I'd say that in situations where ambiguity exists, the desirable outcome would be to clarify that ambiguity before proceeding to adjudication.

Exactly, if you didn't know there was another Borborygmos printed, and you knew that name was contained in the card name, you would never in a million years say "that land-throwing beast guy" so I don't know why that's being used in defense of the rule or as an example for how this guy could have avoided it coming up.

Given that, I don't personally care that the guy got held to it, just noting this because I'm posting on the internet.

MiddleEastBeast fucked around with this message at 23:00 on Jan 11, 2016

# ? Jan 11, 2016 22:57

Serperoth: Feb 21, 2013

Voyager I posted:

I think the general permissiveness with naming contributes to the problem. Usually even the vaguest description is good enough, so if you don't know that some obscure card actually has another, even more obscure card from ten years ago with an overlapping name, there's no reason to expect so much precision to suddenly be necessary to not get rules lawyered.

Again, I understand that the Judges did their jobs and interpreted the rules correctly, but what the situation actually reflects is an undesirable snag in the current rules and not something we should pretend is somehow a good outcome. In general, I'd say that in situations where ambiguity exists, the desirable outcome would be to clarify that ambiguity before proceeding to adjudication.

You don't even need to NAME something. I can say "That blue planeswalker with the 4 activated abilities", and that'd be JTMS. If there's doubt, call a Judge, and clarify it. The problem isn't that he named something that wasn't Borborygmos Enraged. The problem was that he named the one card that was unambiguously the WRONG card. I posted earlier in the thread a list of things he could've named that would have counted. It isn't "Ha, gotcha, I was bluffing all along", it was a misplay by someone at the top 8 of a Modern tournament. Hell, he could have named (as he asked later) "Borborygmos, the one in your deck", and it'd have been clear (mostly).

# ? Jan 11, 2016 23:01

Entropic: Feb 21, 2007; patriarchy sucks

Saying the full name and title of legendary creatures is awkward and makes you sound like a nerd because no one ever refers to legends other than by their first name, because that's how normal people talk and it basically never matters. Except in this one case where it does and you get dicked by the rules because of a card you didn't know existed.

I can only think of one other case where it would matter (Nicol Bolas vs Nicol Bolas, Planeswalker) and it would be equally obvious there which one was actually meant.

The judges enforced the rules as written, but Magic is a complicated-rear end game where the rules don't properly account for every eventuality, and getting someone on that is pretty dickish.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 23:08

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 24, 2024 18:14

mcmagic: Jul 1, 2004; If you see this avatar while scrolling the succ zone, you have been visited by the mcmagic of shitty lib takes! Good luck and prosperity will come to you, but only if you reply "shut the fuck up mcmagic" to this post!

IDK how there is any defense for such scummy behavior. Anyone who isn't a scumbag would never even think of that.

# ? Jan 11, 2016 23:08

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > Magic the Gathering Appreciation Station

«‹›1715 »