|
Weird Pumpkin posted:I still think it should work like that, how can there possibly be two jaces around at the same time, no one plane could contain that much dorky energy I agree. The Legend rule was always fairly easy to comprehend: if you play a second one, all other legendary copies get murked because you summoned that legend to your side. It makes sense flavor-wise, it makes sense mechanically, and it gives you a reason to keep extra copies in your hand. Seriously, is that a difficult mechanic to comprehend for people?
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 12:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 11:43 |
|
|
mycomancy posted:I agree. The Legend rule was always fairly easy to comprehend: if you play a second one, all other legendary copies get murked because you summoned that legend to your side. It makes sense flavor-wise, it makes sense mechanically, and it gives you a reason to keep extra copies in your hand. Well, people do get it wrong. For example, you, just now. The original legend rule was that when a legendary permanent came into play, if there was already copy of it on any side, the newer one dies. Kamigawa changed it to "they all die" instead of "the newer one dies". M14 changed it to only look at your side of the board and also you get to choose which one dies. e: ah, the planeswalker uniqueness rule worked like you say. Qwertycoatl fucked around with this message at 13:18 on Feb 8, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 13:16
|
|
|
mycomancy posted:I agree. The Legend rule was always fairly easy to comprehend: if you play a second one, all other legendary copies get murked because you summoned that legend to your side. It makes sense flavor-wise, it makes sense mechanically, and it gives you a reason to keep extra copies in your hand. It's not difficult to comprehend, the original legend rule just heavily favoured being on the play and lead to feel-bad situations where you can't play your cards. Imagine how much worse Ragavan would be for the game - and it's pretty bad already - if you couldn't play it on the draw against one on the play
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 13:24
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:It's not difficult to comprehend, the original legend rule just heavily favoured being on the play and lead to feel-bad situations where you can't play your cards. Imagine how much worse Ragavan would be for the game - and it's pretty bad already - if you couldn't play it on the draw against one on the play The original poster child for this:  If you opponent got theirs out it totally sucked because you couldn't cast your own and do your game plan until you got rid of it. It's what motivated the Kamigawa change - if both copies die you don't get a first mover (or last mover) advantage
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 13:29
|
|
|
I liked the Kamigawa version from a flavour perspective. Two Planeswalkers having a duel and they both try to summon he same unique creature and… ooops we broke the multiverse a bit there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 13:31
|
|
|
I liked it during the Kamigawa days because then legends were (incredibly narrow) removal, so not a dead card unless you already had one on the field. I understand the problems with that approach, but I always liked it. Also flavor-wise it was fun to imagine the legendary fighting against you getting called up to now help you and deciding "gently caress this" and just leaving.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 13:33
|
|
|
Qwertycoatl posted:Well, people do get it wrong. For example, you, just now. The original legend rule was that when a legendary permanent came into play, if there was already copy of it on any side, the newer one dies. Kamigawa changed it to "they all die" instead of "the newer one dies". M14 changed it to only look at your side of the board and also you get to choose which one dies. Lol gently caress, my friend group from the 90 interpreted/hosed it up to the way I described it, so that was never the way it had ever worked? That's a poo poo rule. Anyway, I bet they get rid of the Legend rule with MOM. Edit: actually I'm 50% thinking it'll be no legends, 50% no Planeswalkers. mycomancy fucked around with this message at 13:50 on Feb 8, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 13:48
|
|
|
T1 ragavan, T2 dash second ragavan
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 13:52
|
|
|
ilmucche posted:T1 ragavan, T2 dash second ragavan And play Ragavans 3 and 4 off the treasures
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 13:53
|
|
|
Serf posted:I liked it during the Kamigawa days because then legends were (incredibly narrow) removal, so not a dead card unless you already had one on the field. I understand the problems with that approach, but I always liked it. Also flavor-wise it was fun to imagine the legendary fighting against you getting called up to now help you and deciding "gently caress this" and just leaving. Yeah that's the first legendary rule played with and I always liked the idea of being able to cast your own legendary as removal to destroy theirs Honestly considering how many decks play Ragavan in modern, being able to cast your own Ragavan to remove both would be pretty great
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 14:31
|
|
|
Weird Pumpkin posted:Yeah that's the first legendary rule played with and I always liked the idea of being able to cast your own legendary as removal to destroy theirs That used to happen in OG Kamigawa, creatureless decks would run Umezawa's Jitte JUST to Legend Rule your opponent's Jitte.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 16:43
|
|
|
A Moose posted:That used to happen in OG Kamigawa, creatureless decks would run Umezawa's Jitte JUST to Legend Rule your opponent's Jitte. I did this because Jitte was a nightmare. Another person in my Commander group has begun putting it in her Ardenn/Tana deck and it gave me PTSD flashbacks
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 16:44
|
|
|
A Moose posted:That used to happen in OG Kamigawa, creatureless decks would run Umezawa's Jitte JUST to Legend Rule your opponent's Jitte. And heck, if they don't play ragavan now you have a 1 mana potentially game ending snowball threat that they are forced to deal with or get massively behind Jitte is definitely a nightmare card though for sure lol
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 17:53
|
|
|
Serf posted:I did this because Jitte was a nightmare. Another person in my Commander group has begun putting it in her Ardenn/Tana deck and it gave me PTSD flashbacks also in scars-innistrad standard, you'd use phantasmal image to blow up geist of st traft
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 18:12
|
|
|
People would pack 4 maindeck Tolarian Academy in Urza block standard just to blow up opposing Academies, even though their deck had zero artifacts 
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 19:54
|
|
|
How this game survived The Urza's Saga block and the Mirrodin block are beyond me. Both of those blocks were so loving broken they should've killed the game flat out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 20:06
|
|
|
mycomancy posted:How this game survived The Urza's Saga block and the Mirrodin block are beyond me. Both of those blocks were so loving broken they should've killed the game flat out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 20:10
|
|
|
mycomancy posted:How this game survived The Urza's Saga block and the Mirrodin block are beyond me. Both of those blocks were so loving broken they should've killed the game flat out. Kamigawa coming after Mirrodin really didn't help the game, but Ravnica was after that and wow was that a flavorful, fun set. Some really good drafting. Time Spiral was also a ton of fun, and then Lorwyn was just so boring I stopped playing for a few years.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 20:16
|
|
|
Chainclaw posted:Kamigawa coming after Mirrodin really didn't help the game, but Ravnica was after that and wow was that a flavorful, fun set. Some really good drafting. Can confirm. I came in during Kamigawa and it was not fun to build Golgari (before we even had the word) spirits tribal and just get rolled by fully kitted out Affinity decks. I had a blast drafting Kamigawa. Everything was expensive and slow and nothing quite worked as smoothly as you wanted. But yeah then Ravnica came along and just blew it out of the water. I spent a lot of my weekend job money on drafts and it was a ball of a time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 20:32
|
|
|
Just started the last shuffle up and play and lmao at the professor repeatedly making GBS threads on the card he built the commander deck around, for the person who helped create that card and was originally very excited to share it with the professor think he'd be excited by it over a mutual interest in the character and original card. I guess if you design Magic cards you probably have to get used to that kind of thing but still lol coming from who I usually see as a pretty nice and friendly host.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 20:32
|
|
|
Serf posted:Golgari (before we even had the word) wait hold on how recent are the names for different colour combos?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 20:36
|
|
|
Johnny Truant posted:wait hold on how recent are the names for different colour combos? They came out with Ravnica as far as I'm aware. I think we had nicknames for them before that that weren't just black-green, but I can't remember them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 20:37
|
|
|
mycomancy posted:How this game survived The Urza's Saga block and the Mirrodin block are beyond me. Both of those blocks were so loving broken they should've killed the game flat out. I worked at an LGS back in the Urza's block days. I'd set up for FNM, wait around, and then put the tables and chairs away. No one wanted to come play Type 2 when decks were so broken.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 20:44
|
|
|
Rules updates! https://magic.wizards.com/en/news/announcements/phyrexia-all-will-be-one-comprehensive-rules-changes quote:A new section has been added to the rules for the battle card type. It has one subrule, which explains that there are currently no battles.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 20:45
|
|
|
loving hell, ONE is one of the most miserable limited formats I've ever played
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 20:50
|
|
|
Johnny Truant posted:wait hold on how recent are the names for different colour combos? Ravnica came out in 2005 and is where we got all the 2 color combo names that are still in use today. Shards of Alara was in 2008 and gave us the allied 3 color combo names we use today. Khans of Tarkir was 2014 and gave us the enemy wedge names. I think one of the bigger failures of MTG branding is using established combos and giving them different names IE Lorehold, Zagoth, etc. I would have written in the setting that "for some reason, no matter the plane, they call organized pairings of Green/Black magic Golgari" etc.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 20:50
|
|
|
ShallNoiseUpon posted:Rules updates! huh they really haven't added a new card type since Planeswalker?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 20:54
|
|
|
Charity Porno posted:I think one of the bigger failures of MTG branding is using established combos and giving them different names IE Lorehold, Zagoth, etc. I would have written in the setting that "for some reason, no matter the plane, they call organized pairings of Green/Black magic Golgari" etc. Memorizing these has been really difficult for me. I've been following the thread for a year now and I still only know maybe less than half of the pairings, and even fewer of the tri-color names
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 20:59
|
|
|
Johnny Truant posted:wait hold on how recent are the names for different colour combos? The two color pairs are from original Ravnica, so 2005. The 3 ally colors are from Shards of Alara in 2008. And then the 3 enemy color wedges (2 colors and the 1 color across from them) are from Khans of Tarkir in 2014. Before Tarkir, people sometimes used the 3-color cards from Apocalypse (2001) along with a mixture of weird in-joke names that referenced old tournaments but they didn't come up a lot because 3 color decks were much less common The only dual lands were the original duals, until the shock lands came out in Ravnica. Usually people just used the letters, like Bant was WUG. Tragically, we still don't have 1 set name for the 4-color cards. I prefer "evil naya" (naya+black), "wet jund" (jund + blue), "wet naya", "wet abzan" and "wet mardu". Sometimes people call them by the names of the Nephilim creatures from OG Ravnica, but they're wrong.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 20:59
|
|
|
The four-color combinations are named Omnath and Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 21:05
|
|
|
You can pry RUG and BUG from my dead hands.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 21:09
|
|
|
ShallNoiseUpon posted:You can pry RUG and BUG from my dead hands. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 21:12
|
|
|
Looking for some advice Me and the boys bought a commander deck (precon) each a month'ish ago, after a 20 year MtG hiatus. We are ready to buy some new stuff now, and are undecided on buying more precons, finding interesting commander decklists and buying those, or trying pauper. To me pauper sounds the most interesting, as precons are a bit too safe and buying 100 specific cards for a commander deck sounds like a nightmare. I grabbed the decklists of the top 6 pauper decks on mtggoldfish and checked which sets the various cards belong in. Looks like about 80% of them are in 8 recent'ish sets (e.g. brothers war, dominaria united etc) with the rest of the cards in older stuff (going as far back as mercadian masques, visions, even alliances, and not reprinted) Im thinking of buying 4 of each common set of the recent ones, sort of like future proofing my card library. Would that be a good idea or will most of the cards never see any play because they are simply garbage? (A part of my motivation for doing this is it looks like it will be easier to buy 4 common sets of several of the sets than to find a single seller that has 4 of each of the cards i need from that set. Another part of the motivation is i have the hope that the next pauper deck i want to try i then have most of the cards already)
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 21:33
|
|
|
ShallNoiseUpon posted:You can pry RUG and BUG from my dead hands. Honestly I don't get how the names are easier then just saying the golors. You don't need to make up wizard words just say RG or something.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 21:34
|
|
|
Ineptitude posted:Looking for some advice Most of the cards won't see play in constructed. A lot of stuff is "draft chaff" that only gets used in limited, because other cards do what they do, but better. I would just buy the cards you need, as you need them. My LGS has a commander league where you buy a precon to start and every week you can sub out 3 cards. Doing something like that might be fun with your group. You can do more than 3 cards if that's not enough to keep it spicy, or put other restrictions on what you can sub in so it doesn't become a credit card arms race.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 21:38
|
|
|
big cummers ONLY posted:Most of the cards won't see play in constructed. A lot of stuff is "draft chaff" that only gets used in limited, because other cards do what they do, but better. I would just buy the cards you need, as you need them. Oh actually yeah, sealed leagues are also pretty fun and a good way to keep costs controlled if you don't want to go all the way to full on constructed OP Basically you start with your conventional sealed start, and then every x amount of losses you can buy/add another pack. Depending on how many people it is, it could be pretty fun to do it with a box, and then do little prizes out of the remainder of the packs that are left over at the end of the league?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 21:45
|
|
|
ShallNoiseUpon posted:Rules updates! quote:702.164 Found the new thread rating system.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 22:01
|
|
|
Silhouette posted:loving hell, ONE is one of the most miserable limited formats I've ever played Yup. Seriously, gently caress this poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 22:03
|
|
|
Silhouette posted:loving hell, ONE is one of the most miserable limited formats I've ever played Rares that should have been mythics? That's my guess, having not played it but having watched a few sealed matches.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 22:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 11:43 |
|
|
LifeLynx posted:Found the new thread rating system. mods, ban this man
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2023 22:07
|
|