|
Some Numbers posted:Ran across this today: http://imgur.com/a/weFrT The Terran design is actually really impressive.
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 01:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 01:26 |
|
|
Mr. Jive posted:The Terran design is actually really impressive. The Salvage mechanic seems playable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 01:37
|
|
|
Barry Shitpeas posted:The comments section in PV's latest Keep or Mulligan got hilarious http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/keep-or-mulligan-with-guest-thiago-saporito/ Magic: The Gathering: Mulligan's Are Cheating
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 02:07
|
|
|
Some Numbers posted:Ran across this today: http://imgur.com/a/weFrT Kerrigan is able to turn herself into a 3/3 zerg creature as her first action which is kind of awkward because she'd still be in summoning sickness. Zergling turning into two 1/1s is a bit much when Thukatongue is already a guy in certain lists. But that's it for complaints from the Zerg part. Well, and Hydralisks not having Reach evokes some sort of guttural anger in me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 02:11
|
|
|
What's a good way to learn the advanced rules of Magic? This weekend I'm going to a prerelease and playing for the first time since original Zendikar. I get all the basic stuff like the idea of how the stack works, but when it comes to more obscure rules interactions that could plausibly show up I'm lost. Reading through 200 pages of comprehensive rules from WOTC is something I'd prefer not to have to do.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 02:41
|
|
|
Eschatos posted:What's a good way to learn the advanced rules of Magic? This weekend I'm going to a prerelease and playing for the first time since original Zendikar. I get all the basic stuff like the idea of how the stack works, but when it comes to more obscure rules interactions that could plausibly show up I'm lost. Reading through 200 pages of comprehensive rules from WOTC is something I'd prefer not to have to do. Honestly you probably won't need them at prerelease. What specifically are you not sure about?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 02:47
|
|
|
Eschatos posted:What's a good way to learn the advanced rules of Magic? This weekend I'm going to a prerelease and playing for the first time since original Zendikar. I get all the basic stuff like the idea of how the stack works, but when it comes to more obscure rules interactions that could plausibly show up I'm lost. Reading through 200 pages of comprehensive rules from WOTC is something I'd prefer not to have to do. If you have a specific question just call for a Judge and they can answer it for you (it's what they don't get paid for  ). Unless the store you're going to is tiny there'll probably be one there. If not there's probably someone there that knows some of the more nuanced stuff.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 02:48
|
|
|
Eschatos posted:What's a good way to learn the advanced rules of Magic? This weekend I'm going to a prerelease and playing for the first time since original Zendikar. I get all the basic stuff like the idea of how the stack works, but when it comes to more obscure rules interactions that could plausibly show up I'm lost. Reading through 200 pages of comprehensive rules from WOTC is something I'd prefer not to have to do. Just knowing how the stack works puts you above a good chunk of people, the second big thing is phase changes so brush up on that part. There isn't anything too complicated in this set outside of some finicky back end stuff with madness which I don't even think is possible to do in limited since removing cards from exile at instant speed it a pretty rare thing. Otherwise if any situation comes up you aren't sure of call for a judge, it's what they are there for.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 02:55
|
|
|
suicidesteve posted:Honestly you probably won't need them at prerelease. What specifically are you not sure about? Well I get how multiple instants and sorceries interact on the stack, but factor in triggered and activated abilities and I become much less sure of what's right. For example, say an opponent tries to Structural Distortion my Westvale Abbey. Can I sac it for Ormendahl in response?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 03:01
|
|
|
You can put anything (barring sorceries on your opponent's turn) you want on the stack as long as you have priority e: so yes, you can to the above
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 03:05
|
|
|
Eschatos posted:Well I get how multiple instants and sorceries interact on the stack, but factor in triggered and activated abilities and I become much less sure of what's right. For example, say an opponent tries to Structural Distortion my Westvale Abbey. Can I sac it for Ormendahl in response? you can, all activated abilities can be activated as instants unless they explicitly say otherwise biggest issue with triggered abilities is when both players have triggered abilities trigger at the same time - in that case, the active player puts their abilities on the stack, and then the non-active player does, so the non-active player's triggered abilities resolve first.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 03:21
|
|
|
GoutPatrol posted:The Salvage mechanic seems playable. Salvage could also be something that could provide interesting decision moments (salvage guy, or recur guy), or on-salvage effects (searing spear with do 1 damage when salvaged)
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 03:27
|
|
|
Eschatos posted:Well I get how multiple instants and sorceries interact on the stack, but factor in triggered and activated abilities and I become much less sure of what's right. For example, say an opponent tries to Structural Distortion my Westvale Abbey. Can I sac it for Ormendahl in response? Abilities are like cards the ability goes on the stack just like a spell does. Unless it says "play this only when you can play a sorcery" then they function like instants. Triggered abilities happen when the condition (trigger) is met. Like when this creature enters the battlefield.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 03:30
|
|
|
Eschatos posted:Well I get how multiple instants and sorceries interact on the stack, but factor in triggered and activated abilities and I become much less sure of what's right. For example, say an opponent tries to Structural Distortion my Westvale Abbey. Can I sac it for Ormendahl in response? Yep. Triggered abilities go on the stack just like a spell would when it's conditions are met. Activated abilities work like instants unless they say otherwise. You'll be fine, prereleases are mad casual. If you have questions don't hesitate to ask your opponent or anyone else around you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 03:36
|
|
|
Some Numbers posted:Ran across this today: http://imgur.com/a/weFrT Well thought out, but like 99% of fan designs half this stuff is way too strong to ever see play. Calldown alone would be broken in any format. Does make me wonder how long it'll take for WOTC to give up the ghost and consider MTG sets that borrow flavor and settings from established universes. Something like a Harry Potter, GoT, or LOTR themed set would be a license to print money, however improbable, but they could definitely get their hands on an IP like WoT, The Stormlight Archives, or the Black Company books and still see a nice little bump.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 04:23
|
|
|
Some Numbers posted:Ran across this today: http://imgur.com/a/weFrT  This card would single-handedly make Storm play white. Jesus, a modal Seething Song. edit: are protoss terrible in SCII now? because my god those protoss cards are awful. They could at least include proliferate on some of the cards to leverage the psi counters. A big flaming stink fucked around with this message at 04:39 on Apr 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 04:24
|
|
|
Rap Record Hoarder posted:Well thought out, but like 99% of fan designs half this stuff is way too strong to ever see play. Calldown alone would be broken in any format. Most of the cards seem really reasonable so far, Calldown is the only outlier I see so far. E: Mass Recall seems pretty crazy though TheKingofSprings fucked around with this message at 04:48 on Apr 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 04:42
|
|
|
Rap Record Hoarder posted:Well thought out, but like 99% of fan designs half this stuff is way too strong to ever see play. Calldown alone would be broken in any format. The closest they've come is the tie-in with that Sorcerer's Apprentice movie, but those cards never actually physically existed. I don't think anyone would be opposed to a Dungeons and Dragons block, as they've already pulled a few things from there (Gobhobbler Rats I think was one, I don't know D&D outside of the Baldur's Gate/Planescape games though) but the trouble is no one really cares about D&D anymore so the cross-marketing isn't worth much. Licensing is probably a nightmare though. I can imagine a scenario where there's a LotR set, and ten years on there's a demand to reprint the Gandalf card or whatever, but they can't because their licensing agreement ran out since they didn't do anything with the property for four years or however it works. I'm not a lawyer, I just know there's a thing where like Fox will lose the rights to the Fantastic Four if they don't pump out a lovely movie every once in a while. At least that Starcraft fan set has someone behind it with rules knowledge who understands templating. Those political Magic cards I see make me cringe with how badly they're worded.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 04:54
|
|
|
BJPaskoff posted:Licensing is probably a nightmare though. I can imagine a scenario where there's a LotR set, and ten years on there's a demand to reprint the Gandalf card or whatever, but they can't because their licensing agreement ran out since they didn't do anything with the property for four years or however it works. I'm not a lawyer, I just know there's a thing where like Fox will lose the rights to the Fantastic Four if they don't pump out a lovely movie every once in a while. Functional reprint Urza as Gandalf 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 04:56
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:
The set is meant to be standalone and never played with other Magic cards, Calldown is fine in that context. It would be interesting to draft and see if it settles into those three archetypes or if other things emerge.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 05:05
|
|
|
So, just started paying attention to the game, since I sort of missed BFZ and OGW though now I've had a chance to draft those and had a bunch of fun playing Boros Allies. What's the general consensus of SoI? I watched LRRs Pre-Pre-Release and it seemed a very interesting set, also I just love the block's flavor.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 05:21
|
|
|
Chamale posted:The set is meant to be standalone and never played with other Magic cards, Calldown is fine in that context. It would be interesting to draft and see if it settles into those three archetypes or if other things emerge. Yeah calldown is seriously powerful in legacy but in the set which has a power rating somewhere between limited and most duel decks calldown seems very fair. This is actually the best set I've seen, I think designing for constructed instead of draft is what makes it so.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 05:36
|
|
|
Salvage seems like a great mechanic for BGu in some set.Onmi posted:So, just started paying attention to the game, since I sort of missed BFZ and OGW though now I've had a chance to draft those and had a bunch of fun playing Boros Allies. What's the general consensus of SoI? I watched LRRs Pre-Pre-Release and it seemed a very interesting set, also I just love the block's flavor. You missed two exceedingly mediocre sets, first off, so it's less missed and more avoided. No one has played enough SOI to get a firm hand on it, but 99% of the players that I know love the flavor and mechanics, and the little I've played with it in limited was very fun. Jen X fucked around with this message at 05:52 on Apr 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 05:50
|
|
|
GeneX posted:Salvage seems like a great mechanic for BGu in some set. I've often had fun with sets people said were mediocre, so what defines a set as mediocre to people? Is it generally a case of "There are a few decks that you can pretty much hope you get into, and all other times you have a complete pile on your hands?" Or... yeah. Like I heard original Innistrad and Zendikar were great drafting sets.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 05:55
|
|
|
Onmi posted:I've often had fun with sets people said were mediocre, so what defines a set as mediocre to people? Is it generally a case of "There are a few decks that you can pretty much hope you get into, and all other times you have a complete pile on your hands?" Or... yeah. Like I heard original Innistrad and Zendikar were great drafting sets. I think a lot of the griping that people have with BFZ/Oath is way off-base and comes from nostalgia for the original sets. Oath in particular I think is a great set, and I've enjoyed drafting OOB. I also have a feeling that SoI is gonna be disappointing to play. A lot of the things that seem pushed aren't proving to be all that effective in practice (admittedly, in early testing) and I don't think any of the mechanics will have much impact. I really wish they would've put in a better madness enabler (Wild Mongrel  ).
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 06:07
|
|
|
Onmi posted:I've often had fun with sets people said were mediocre, so what defines a set as mediocre to people? Is it generally a case of "There are a few decks that you can pretty much hope you get into, and all other times you have a complete pile on your hands?" Or... yeah. Like I heard original Innistrad and Zendikar were great drafting sets. Original Innistrad was very fun, Zendikar was trash garbage. You may be thinking of Rise of the Eldrazi, which was great. Zendikar sucked because it was too aggressive. There were no defensive options, too many evasive 2-mana creatures and all of the most effective cards were concentrated in B/R. This was before they ever printed the Fight mechanic so green was totally useless for a while. Usually the worst sets are the ones where good aggro decks are too strong, so you if you don't get to draft aggro well you're screwed. Good formats have a wide variety of viable deck archetypes. For all the hate Oath of the Gatewatch gets I enjoy it a lot, all 5 colors are playable and it rewards reading signals and staying open. I hate formats where the best strategy is to open a bomb rare and hope that that color is open (such as Fate Reforged.) Lets Pickle fucked around with this message at 06:20 on Apr 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 06:16
|
|
|
Lets Pickle posted:Original Innistrad was very fun, Zendikar was trash garbage. You may be thinking of Rise of the Eldrazi, which was great. Okay but... why I ask again, what made them stand out/not?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 06:17
|
|
|
Onmi posted:I've often had fun with sets people said were mediocre, so what defines a set as mediocre to people? Is it generally a case of "There are a few decks that you can pretty much hope you get into, and all other times you have a complete pile on your hands?" Or... yeah. Like I heard original Innistrad and Zendikar were great drafting sets. The art was awful, the story was even worse, and just the design in general was pretty mediocre It did play nicely in limited, but I was contrasting SOI's flavor (which is a great return set) to BFZ's (which is bland eldrazi garbage), since I can't exactly compare an unreleased set to another playwise
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 06:30
|
|
|
Onmi posted:I've often had fun with sets people said were mediocre, so what defines a set as mediocre to people? Is it generally a case of "There are a few decks that you can pretty much hope you get into, and all other times you have a complete pile on your hands?" Or... yeah. Like I heard original Innistrad and Zendikar were great drafting sets. Development of BFZ was rushed and it shows. Creatures are/aren't Allies arbitrarily, processing has almost no synergy with Oath cards so BFZ tends to be mostly filler and "Oh yeah, that card was bonkers in BBB but now my opponent will never have anything in exile so it sucks" type cards. Oh yeah, and green is unplayable in BFZ so you'd better hope green is open both ways in Oath. I still like OOB draft a lot, it's just that the set synergy sucks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 06:42
|
|
|
Oath is a perfectly fine set, but Battle for Zendikar kind of blew. OOB is a pretty good draft format (almost entirely off the back of Oath,) but BBB suuuucked.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 06:56
|
|
|
Riff on a deck style I've been seeing a lot. Plays surprisingly well even though it looks like its full of weird non-combos. Deck: UW Dragons, Angels and Humans   //Lands 2 Evolving Wilds 4 Island 7 Plains 4 Port Town 4 Prairie Stream 3 Westvale Abbey //Spells 3 Declaration in Stone 2 Eerie Interlude 4 Gideon, Ally of Zendikar 4 Secure the Wastes 2 Silkwrap //Creatures 2 Archangel Avacyn 4 Consul's Lieutenant 3 Dragonlord Ojutai 4 Knight of the White Orchid 4 Reflector Mage 4 Thalia's Lieutenant //Sideboard 2 Jace, Unraveler of Secrets 3 Always Watching 2 Negate 3 Dispel 1 Declaration in Stone 1 Descend Upon the Sinful 1 Silkwrap 2 Stasis Snare  Display deck statistics
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 07:01
|
|
|
I really preferred triple BFZ to OGW-BFZ as a draft format, personally.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 07:01
|
|
|
Oath also feels like a format with a clear "best" deck (W/B), which makes limited seem even more "same-y" than old formats tend to be.
Niton fucked around with this message at 07:12 on Apr 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 07:10
|
|
|
Yeah I liked BBB quite a bit, but it was definitely a weak set, both in design and impact on constructed. Oath was cool, I like all the Standard pushed cards in it. Innistrad seems like a total home run.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 07:11
|
|
|
Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:Well, and Hydralisks not having Reach evokes some sort of guttural anger in me. This is the same emotion I experienced. Otherwise I find custom magic sets that riff off other IPs to be constantly disappointing and poorly designed. People focus too much on trying to translate mechanics of other games into MtG to often disastrous ends, and sometimes its just that you can't. The main focus should be on lore and flavour rather and even then people gently caress that up by pigeon holing characters and factions to the wrong colours. The fact that the lore characters are Planeswalkers for example pisses me off too, which is something amateur designers do often which is a poor choice. Like the SW set from awhile back that had Sideous as a planeswalker. I get that's something that's supposed to give each deck a walker for gameplay purposes but it still jives with me the wrong way. At the end of the day I need a sort of immersion and suspension of disbelief to really appreciate a good custom set; that I can imagine this as a world and characters that exist in the Multiverse along with Ravnica or Tarkir as well. That's really hard when I'm looking at a card that represents something I also have built in assumptions about and that drat Hydralisk is a good example. Rimusutera fucked around with this message at 08:13 on Apr 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 08:11
|
|
|
Eschatos posted:What's a good way to learn the advanced rules of Magic? This weekend I'm going to a prerelease and playing for the first time since original Zendikar. I get all the basic stuff like the idea of how the stack works, but when it comes to more obscure rules interactions that could plausibly show up I'm lost. Reading through 200 pages of comprehensive rules from WOTC is something I'd prefer not to have to do.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 08:14
|
|
|
Some Numbers posted:Ran across this today: http://imgur.com/a/weFrT  This card is hilariously terrible
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 11:04
|
|
|
I do have a worry with SoI that the set is trying to do too much and will therefore fail to properly push any of its themes. There's a good number of cards that look decent in the various archetypes at least.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 12:08
|
|
|
Lunsku posted:I really preferred triple BFZ to OGW-BFZ as a draft format, personally. Niton posted:Oath also feels like a format with a clear "best" deck (W/B), which makes limited seem even more "same-y" than old formats tend to be. Oblivion Strike and Isolation Zone made drafting really unfun. Who cares about sweet rares and build-around-me uncommons when you've got these two bombs at common that completely outclass them. It's weird how development clearly botched BFZ pretty badly but it still turned out fun, while OGW had better execution but still ended up weaker. I thought OGW was fine but the store I play at had to switch to conspiracy/origins drafts a month ago because nobody would show up for Oath. Irony Be My Shield posted:I do have a worry with SoI that the set is trying to do too much and will therefore fail to properly push any of its themes. There's a good number of cards that look decent in the various archetypes at least. I've done some cockatrice drafts and the themes seem to be in a place where pretty much every deck will care about them. It doesn't take much work to end up with a few cards that care about your graveyard and a few ways to put stuff there. On the other hand the major enablers/payoffs are all at uncommon/rare, it looks like trying to draft a dedicated madness/delirium deck is going to be a trap. Tribal decks don't look good either. All the common vampires are awful. Werewolves and Humans have some good stuff at common but there's not enough reasons to draft mediocre tribal cards instead of generic cards that are good on their own.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 12:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 01:26 |
|
|
alansmithee posted:I think a lot of the griping that people have with BFZ/Oath is way off-base and comes from nostalgia for the original sets. Oath in particular I think is a great set, and I've enjoyed drafting OOB. I started at World wake, and I hated original Zendikar block. If not for Jace, Stone Forge, the fetches, the man lands, and the Eldrazi legends, no one would care. -landfall was the only mechanic worth anything. Allies were parasitic and bad, having tons of random lands was meh, the equipment subtheme wasn't expounded upon, and rise had the hilarious wall subtheme. Also, multikicker on like three cards for some reason. -world wake was almost completely worthless except playing the Jace lottery. I can't remember anyone actually liking the set. -really dumb standard environment, spearheaded by Jace. Jace is actually responsible for all kinds of dumb poo poo. Shops gouging pre-orders, future play walker design being somewhat homogeneous for a few years, mythics being standard bombs instead of unique effects (you can blame m10 for this to be fair). You eventually got to a point where you had to play Jace in standard or lose. - other mythics and planes walkers being trash. Let me tell you about opening Chandra instead of Jace. Gideon was cool though. - halo hunter existing in same standard as baneslayer. I don't get the love or desire for the set other than the money that came from the first set. Battle and path also just seemed super boring and bad to me. Devoid? I really don't care about my cards having a color for the most part. Awaken? Probably cool in limited, but I don't want to do anything to kill my lands/tempo. Ingest? Cool idea but useless outside of limited, if it's even useful there. Cohort is also parasitic, but it at least is mitigated by putting ally on more cards, something wizards specifically said they wanted to do in the past. Both Zendikar and Battle were preceded by cool multicolor sets. Both had land play that enabled obnoxious 3-4 color shenanigans for a bit. Both utterly ruined constructed formats to the point of drawing bans. I hate Zendikar so much.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 12:49
|
|
