|
suicidesteve posted:Oh my god. I forgot about this. I take it back, change is great. I wouldn't call it confusing so much as unintuitive. It's the kind of rule you'd never guess until someone explained it to you, and it's easy to see why they'd want to pare down on rules like that as a matter of course. I am gonna miss it, though. 
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 00:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 22:00 |
|
|
So next set will have land cycling and they'll reprint eternal dragon and that's why the duals are typed and the durdly uw control deck in ffl was so powerful they had to print the sephopopophod. Calling it now. e: also because sphinx's rev is a perfect reprint Pontius Pilate fucked around with this message at 00:04 on Apr 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 00:01
|
|
|
AbbadonOfHell posted:But it didn't? Card says you can cast a card cmc 3 or less. One of the little card pics is less than 3 and the card says you can cast one or both halves from your hand. Seems pretty simple. None of what you just said is straightforward or intuitive.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 00:11
|
|
|
DangerDongs posted:Removing damage on the stack was barbaric, especially to blue in limited. I enjoyed damage on the stack for the depth it brought, but if you've ever played in limited against someone when they didn't know about it and you did, it felt like cheating. The biggest loss is old Ravnica and Time Spiral drafts not being as awesome as they once were.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 00:12
|
|
|
Imagine walking ballista if damage still used the stack.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 00:14
|
|
|
They should have just gone all the way and just made the CMC outside of the stack the greater of the two split halves because split cards interact horribly with bob and wotc loves them some GBx decks
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 00:14
|
|
|
Cactrot posted:None of what you just said is straightforward or intuitive. Lol have you even read the cards we're talking about here? Look at the bottom of the fuse card it explains like half of it right there. Sorry this is too difficult for you to grasp.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 00:17
|
|
|
Pontius Pilate posted:Imagine walking ballista if damage still used the stack. *pours out 40 for Triskelion*
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 00:19
|
|
|
AbbadonOfHell posted:Lol have you even read the cards we're talking about here? Look at the bottom of the fuse card it explains like half of it right there. Sorry this is too difficult for you to grasp. Go to the prerelease or FNM and ask ten strangers how it worked, see how many get it right
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 00:23
|
|
|
AbbadonOfHell posted:Lol have you even read the cards we're talking about here? Look at the bottom of the fuse card it explains like half of it right there. Sorry this is too difficult for you to grasp. It's a stupid, counter intuitive interaction and it being removed from the game is a good thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 00:23
|
|
|
AbbadonOfHell posted:Lol have you even read the cards we're talking about here? Look at the bottom of the fuse card it explains like half of it right there. Sorry this is too difficult for you to grasp. I know how the rules worked, they just worked in a non-intuitive way.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 00:24
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:I didn't see this posted: This is a good change. Floating Wear//Tear and Vendillion Clique on top with Counterbalance/Top in play and countering 1/2/3 was real nonsense. Of course Miracles doesn't mind being able to reveal Wear//Tear to counter 3 drops either. Attorney at Funk posted:The real tragedy here is floating a Wear//Tear with Counter-Top is no longer the most fun thing to do in Legacy. Someone ran a Brainstorm into my Counterbalance and I revealed Wear//Tear, then they played a two drop and I revealed Wear//Tear. It was great.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 00:33
|
|
|
Elyv posted:It's like how transformed dudes used to have a CMC of 0, they found a piece of rules that they didn't like and took the opportunity to get rid of it. Aftermath can't be cast from the hand by its own rules. I don't think it would be relevant.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 00:33
|
|
|
Hellsau posted:Someone ran a Brainstorm into my Counterbalance and I revealed Wear//Tear, then they played a two drop and I revealed Wear//Tear. It was great. Nothing gold can stay...
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 00:37
|
|
|
I absolutely agree it was a judge deck. This rule change is a good idea and horrifically boring. It wasn't even particularly busted, but oh well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 00:37
|
|
|
suicidesteve posted:I'll still never understand how anyone found this or the CMC of flip cards (which I still dislike) confusing though. What happens if you try to cast a breaking and entering with an Expertise? What is the CMC when it's on the stack? Can you counter it with a spell snare? I'm pretty sure most players find the answers to these questions unintuitive when they first hear them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 00:37
|
|
|
Marketing New Brain posted:I enjoyed damage on the stack for the depth it brought, but if you've ever played in limited against someone when they didn't know about it and you did, it felt like cheating.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 00:52
|
|
|
The MTG version of being woke is performatively defending a mythical idiot who is simultaneously very excited to learn the rules of the game but ready to instantly quit when they discover the first rule that violates their robotically rigid aesthetical opinions about the rules.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 00:56
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:What happens if you try to cast a breaking and entering with an Expertise? What is the CMC when it's on the stack? Can you counter it with a spell snare? The answer to 2/3 of your questions doesn't change with this new rule, so It becomes much easier to understand if you think of a split card as 2 separate cards.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 00:56
|
|
|
Where all the spoilers at? Usually we get a load of previews from the community at this point.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 00:58
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:Where all the spoilers at? Usually we get a load of previews from the community at this point. We got a fair amount last week, which probably eats into it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 00:59
|
|
|
suicidesteve posted:The answer to 2/3 of your questions doesn't change with this new rule, so That's insincere since the reason the spell snare question is confusing is because of the way "free" fusion spells worked. Now the question simply doesn't come up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:02
|
|
|
I can't wait to Transgress my opponent's two-mana spell because it's stapled to a new-flashback thing and actually has a CMC of 4.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:09
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:Where all the spoilers at? Usually we get a load of previews from the community at this point. Community previews start tomorrow (as early as tonight at Midnight). CFB will have one, along with some people listed in this article http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/daily-magic-update/update-2017-04-03
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:30
|
|
|
I was trying to figure out why anyone cared about this beck call deck then I found the saffron olive article, when's that guy going to talk about how great Hitler is??
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:37
|
|
|
black potus posted:I was trying to figure out why anyone cared about this beck call deck then I found the saffron olive article, when's that guy going to talk about how great Hitler is?? A guy who falls for spoilers like he does could probably be convinced Mein Kampf was correct pretty easily.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:39
|
|
|
Don't worry guys your garbage combo may not work but at least you can't get Inquisitioned now, seems like a wash.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:41
|
|
|
Guys, I know SO's voice is miserably off-putting, but let's not jump the gun here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:45
|
|
|
TheMaestroso posted:Guys, I know SO's voice is miserably off-putting, but let's not jump the gun here. He has the voice you imagine John Wayne Gacy speaking to his victims in
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:47
|
|
|
Attorney at Funk posted:He has the voice you imagine John Wayne Gacy speaking to his victims in Hey it's John, probably better known as the last thing you're going to see before you die.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:50
|
|
|
TheMaestroso posted:Guys, I know SO's voice is miserably off-putting, but let's not jump the gun here. Who's voice is worse? His or the OpenBoosters guy?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:56
|
|
|
black potus posted:I was trying to figure out why anyone cared about this beck call deck then I found the saffron olive article, when's that guy going to talk about how great Hitler is?? Caleb was playing a few versions a while back and it's kinda funny. It's another whatever deck that's neat to see in action once or twice that spiked hundreds of dollars and is gonna burn a bunch of ppl who bought into some t4 deck for most of the price of a real one, rip them
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:59
|
|
|
Marketing New Brain posted:I enjoyed damage on the stack for the depth it brought, but if you've ever played in limited against someone when they didn't know about it and you did, it felt like cheating. There is no depth in damage on the stack. There is mechanical complexity but there was never a decision tree. Now there is, and that decision tree is depth.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 02:04
|
|
|
black potus posted:Don't worry guys your garbage combo may not work but at least you can't get Inquisitioned now, seems like a wash. I'm glad I'm not alone in thinking losing one lovely brew is not a particularly high cost to pay to 1) streamline the game 2) weaken bloodbraid elf and counterbalance.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 02:09
|
|
|
I think a distinction ought to be drawn between being unintuitive, which includes plenty of things that are otherwise fine for magic (going all the way back to the "I put an unholy strength and a holy strength on my air elemental at the same time!!" example from the Alpha rulebook), and being actually difficult for a person of reasonable cognitive and language-using capabilities to understand once the loophole or edge case is described to them, which covers... very few things in Magic, actually? Of course, opinions may differ with respect to whether the janky Beck//Call combos were actually good for Magic. I happen to think they were fine. They enabled some cool janky decks that weren't actually a threat to the metagame.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 02:29
|
|
|
The only tricky bit was being able to check one half of the card to see if you were allowed to cast it for free, and then actually casting the other half/both. Pretty much everything else around split cards was completely logical and straightforward if you just thought about them as two separate cards stuck together, which is a really easy mental model to grasp.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 02:45
|
|
|
little munchkin posted:"auras and 4 mana do-nothing enchantments" sounds like the worst draft archetype ever this could not be more wrong and i look forward to drafting the gently caress out of cartouche-matters decks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 02:47
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Who's voice is worse? His or the OpenBoosters guy? Open boosters guy is cool because he can't read the cards without loving them up
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 02:51
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:I think a distinction ought to be drawn between being unintuitive, which includes plenty of things that are otherwise fine for magic (going all the way back to the "I put an unholy strength and a holy strength on my air elemental at the same time!!" example from the Alpha rulebook), and being actually difficult for a person of reasonable cognitive and language-using capabilities to understand once the loophole or edge case is described to them, which covers... very few things in Magic, actually? On the other hand with 17,000+ cards there are so many goddamn "loopholes" and "edge cases" that if you can cut down on them without really impacting the game (e.g. only hurting some janky decks that didn't have much impact on the metagame), you should.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 03:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 22:00 |
|
|
JerryLee posted:I think a distinction ought to be drawn between being unintuitive, which includes plenty of things that are otherwise fine for magic (going all the way back to the "I put an unholy strength and a holy strength on my air elemental at the same time!!" example from the Alpha rulebook), and being actually difficult for a person of reasonable cognitive and language-using capabilities to understand once the loophole or edge case is described to them, which covers... very few things in Magic, actually? You're talking about diagetic and exegetic mechanical effects vs. flavor. And personally I'm all in for mechanical streamlining all day since too many games have dumb, unnecessary fiddly bits. MTG is a 20yo game and there's been lots of rules technology that's been developed since then.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 03:32
|
|
