|
Man reading this Sam Stoddard article makes it even harder to like Ken Nagle.quote:KEN 5/11/2015: :/ 
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 17:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 09:37 |
|
|
C-Euro posted:That's what I figured, I just know Karn exiles stuff and Ugin wipes non-colorless stuff which seem to line up with how the deck operates. Deck sounds scary from the few lists I've seen, gotta make sure I'm stocked up on land destruction and non-basic hate. actually with them finally printing a colorless basic land blood moon would be a cool way of making decks use wastes if they want powerful cards like warping wail or reality smasher (note i dont believe for a second they will reprint blood moon)
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 17:29
|
|
|
Zoness posted:Man reading this Sam Stoddard article makes it even harder to like Ken Nagle. I remember when he got to write a mothership article for the first time and it was just a bunch of internet memes. The second article was much more toned down, but since then I haven't seen articles from him very frequently, and probably for good reason.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 17:35
|
|
|
Barry Shitpeas posted:Imagine if for SoI Wizards started showing Tibalt in key art, write him into the story, reveal his new card art...and then it's a reprint. NivMizzet posted:I'm going to bet that when they finally unveil the Legion of Doom that Liliana will reluctantly join because she's "evil". Then at a critical turning point where the good guys are about to lose she will decide she's "not that evil" and save them. But she's not a nerd so she won't join the Justice League and will just keep secretly fawning over grognard-stand-in Jace and so she can act as Lone-Wolf-turned-Deus-Ex-Machina when Creative writes themselves into a corner.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 17:37
|
|
|
I feel like if MaRo is excited about something with regards to fiction it's probably bad. Y'know like Roseanne or his self-insert adopted from a treatment for a WESLEY episode of TNG.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 17:39
|
|
|
You know thinking about it the uproar over Reality Hemorrhage is pretty silly. It's on-curve with Ghostfire and it's not a completely unreasonable inclusion in modern burn over Pyrite Spellbomb.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
Hey, so tomorrow is my birthday, figured what the hell, I'd spend it playing Magic. Better than the last three. Anyway, never done a draft, and I'm still unfamiliar with the whole process. I mean I get how it works, but actually doing it is new. Do I still stick to CABS and BREAD, or do I want to go bigger than in the prerelease?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 19:55
|
|
|
Zoness posted:Man reading this Sam Stoddard article makes it even harder to like Ken Nagle. Yes, but: quote:KEN 10/22/2014: Would like to try Snapcasters as red cards for more casual red appeal. is pretty sweet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:05
|
|
|
Could not find the original post that had the mtgo image , but the Abrupt Decay promos are coming in paper.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
"Target player chooses a creature with flying he or she controls. Tears of Valakut deals 7 damage to that creature" is a hilarious, obvious development-designed card.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
Bugsy posted:Could not find the original post that had the mtgo image , but the Abrupt Decay promos are coming in paper. When will they do the abrupt decay art where it kills a counterbalance or blood moon I mean c'mon.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:"Target player chooses a creature with flying he or she controls. Tears of Valakut deals 7 damage to that creature" is a hilarious, obvious development-designed card. I can't believe they actually considered that, it's like babby's first magic set editor removal spell.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:I can't believe they actually considered that, it's like babby's first magic set editor removal spell. And therefore totally awesome. They should have printed it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
Bugsy posted:Could not find the original post that had the mtgo image , but the Abrupt Decay promos are coming in paper. That is some bad art.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:15
|
|
|
Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:I can't believe they actually considered that, it's like babby's first magic set editor removal spell. I'm pretty sure the just-mentioned Abrupt Decay fits in that category. The most obvious "Play Me In Modern" spell I can think of.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:16
|
|
|
I like the flavor text, though it could probably be more concise.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
Lets Pickle posted:I like the flavor text, though it could probably be more concise. It should have been "You are already dead" And I'd hope the japanese version would have the appropriate art for that of course.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:18
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:If you're not looking to play colorless sources I think Goblin Dark-Dwellers is probably the biggest card. A 4/4 menace that casts Crackling Doom or Kolaghan's Command at your opponent seems pretty good. Return is only when you cast.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
I read it slightly wrong, target player chooses the creature that gets hit. So it's a red flying-only edict, which is even stranger than babby's first magic set editor card. That would be like "Choose a creature or player. Babby's Bolt deals 3 damage to that creature or player."
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
"Target player sacrifices a creature named 'Dragonlord Ojutai'"
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:25
|
|
|
"Target creature's controller sacrifices it" is a real template  .
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:28
|
|
|
Lancelot posted:Return is only when you cast.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
Zoness posted:"Target creature's controller sacrifices it" is a real template But it needs to by pass hexproof because
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:35
|
|
|
http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/latest-developments/m-files-oath-gatewatch-part-1-2016-01-22 In the design Article there's a bunch of stuff on Stone Haven Outfitter talking about FFL, which makes me almost hopeful that maybe we'll see playable equipment in the next block. Or it could just be Development thinking stuff that's bad is good. But then you have stuff like this quote:As you can see, this started off as a functional reprint of Skyhunter Cub, but we struggled to get the Equipment-matters deck to work well enough. It worked well enough in Mirrodin because of just how much Equipment the set had—numbers we would not be matching with Oath of the Gatewatch, and numbers that Battle for Zendikar didn't have. It meant that cards like this were basically amazing if you happened to get a lot of Equipment, but bad if you didn't. We tried moving it around to getting flying if you had an Equipment, but that had similar (albeit lesser) problems. The solution we ended up on was making the card more generically powerful, and making it so that it was a card you would want in an Equipment deck, but not something that rewarded you as explicitly. At the same time, we condensed some of the Equipment-matters cards to being a smaller total number, but having more of an impact.  Also loving  Hedron Alignment was originally a Mythic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
Entropic posted:http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/latest-developments/m-files-oath-gatewatch-part-1-2016-01-22 quote:Also loving I actually don't think Hedron Alignment is a bad Mythic; it has the the line "You win the Game" on it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:45
|
|
|
Elyv posted:I actually don't think Hedron Alignment is a bad Mythic; it has the the line "You win the Game" on it. Considering how very little it does in limited it seems like it would be a good candidate for being a mythic just so it shows up less.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:49
|
|
|
Yeah. Less chance to see that floating around would be great since we already have a cycle of cards with a power level of common/uncommon in limited but are rare due to the planeswalker text. Also a card that is basically "2W: Do nothing" at rare.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:52
|
|
|
Alaan posted:Yeah. Less chance to see that floating around would be great since we already have a cycle of cards with a power level of common/uncommon in limited but are rare due to the planeswalker text. Also a card that is basically "2W: Do nothing" at rare. Which card is this, because Gideon's Oath is a bad raise the alarm but it's not complete trash in limited.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:Which card is this, because Gideon's Oath is a bad raise the alarm but it's not complete trash in limited. Call the Gatewatch And Hedron Alignment would be the most disappointing mythic ever; you need 3 more of it before it does anything. It'd be like Mythic Search the City.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
Bugsy posted:Considering how very little it does in limited it seems like it would be a good candidate for being a mythic just so it shows up less. I feel like you can't win either way. As a rare, you get a useless card showing up more in draft, as a Mythic you get people bitching that the slot that's supposed to be for exciting powerful cards is being filled by some designer's janky pet garbage card.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:56
|
|
|
Entropic posted:I feel like you can't win either way. As a rare, you get a useless card showing up more in draft, as a Mythic you get people bitching that the slot that's supposed to be for exciting powerful cards is being filled by some designer's janky pet garbage card. The obvious answer is to have either A) not printed it at all or 2) make it a lovely uncommon.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
Entropic posted:I feel like you can't win either way. As a rare, you get a useless card showing up more in draft, as a Mythic you get people bitching that the slot that's supposed to be for exciting powerful cards is being filled by some designer's janky pet garbage card. So put it at common and watch people actually have fun trying to win with it???
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
I have a super dumb question that I had come up while the judge wasn't there at the last FNM. Can someone "fail to find" for a rally as a result of a Hallowed Moonlight in response to the rally?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 22:00
|
|
|
Entropic posted:http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/latest-developments/m-files-oath-gatewatch-part-1-2016-01-22 Huh, Expedite used to be the card everyone wishes it was. "This card was trying to do noble work by letting you play it, cast a creature with surge, then attack with it, but ultimately it was wasn't worth all of the extra words versus just being the simple version it is today."
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 22:00
|
|
|
Obsoletely Fabulous posted:I have a super dumb question that I had come up while the judge wasn't there at the last FNM. Can someone "fail to find" for a rally as a result of a Hallowed Moonlight in response to the rally? Lol no. Unless the card has "may" its a forced thing. Hallowed moonlight directly counters and exiles every eligible target.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 22:01
|
|
|
Obsoletely Fabulous posted:I have a super dumb question that I had come up while the judge wasn't there at the last FNM. Can someone "fail to find" for a rally as a result of a Hallowed Moonlight in response to the rally?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
Count Bleck posted:The obvious answer is to have either A) not printed it at all or 2) make it a lovely uncommon. I don't think they want "You Win the game" as card text below rare because they want those cards to feel special and cool. They should make them actually approaching playable if they want people to feel that way about them though. I think it would actually have been cool if they'd bumped a mana off it and put it at uncommon as a filter effect / lovely surge enabler where and made it a stupid deck you could try to draft. Except that you're actually extremely unlikely to have 4 of the same uncommon opened in a draft, let alone get all of them, so it would be a total trap and not a real deck. I think it's just a bad card that probably should have gone back to the drawing board.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:So put it at common and watch people actually have fun trying to win with it??? but NWO
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
Yawgmoth posted:The only time you can fail to find is when an effect tells you to search for a card that has specific attributes. worth emphasizing that it has to be a search specifically, not a choice or just automatic effect that just involves specific attributes if loxodon smiter is the only legal target for your inquisition of kozilek you don't get to not screw yourself
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 09:37 |
|
|
Yawgmoth posted:The only time you can fail to find is when an effect tells you to search for a card that has specific attributes. You can only fail to find when an effect tells you to look for (either search, or look in the top X cards, etc) for a card that has specific attributes in a hidden zone. The only hidden zones are the deck and the sideboard. Having previously seen one or the other (like if you got milled in game 1 or mindslavered which allows the controlling player to view the sideboard, as the owner of the sideboard can view it at any time) does not change the status of that zone to public. e: had this as search, forgot how wishes/collected company / etc worked. Sigma-X fucked around with this message at 22:18 on Jan 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 22:08
|
|