|
Tonde Mo Nai posted:Realizing this thing had jumped to $350+ I checked this and  I can't remember any other time when realizing I suddenly "have" over $1000 I didn't know about has given me such a sinking feeling. 
JerryLee fucked around with this message at 01:58 on Feb 8, 2014 |
#
¿
Feb 8, 2014 01:55
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 08:37 |
|
|
To add to the discussion about which punisher spells have seen play, Molten Influence was a bit of a sideboard card. Browbeat is probably the classic punishment spell that came closer to the cusp of playability than most, but I think even in its day most people decided it wasn't worth it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
Elysiume posted:FtV barely counts as a reprint. It's not like that many get made and they're a bitch and a half to get. Yeah, FTV is really cool for bling but it doesn't really count as "reprinting" in the relevant sense.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2014 06:43
|
|
|
They already reprinted Damnation with different art once, did everybody poo poo their pants then?  I think both Damnation arts are pretty defensible, just different styles.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2014 08:20
|
|
|
Mikujin posted:It's no different from using any other degenerate legendary dude. Unless I've missed something, none of the gods should be even on the radar when it comes to degenerate commanders.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2014 00:45
|
|
|
Now everyone on the Internet has visual proof, not to mention his first and last name and what store he plays at. Wouldn't wanna be him.  vvv haha if that's true it's even better.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2014 05:52
|
|
|
If you want a direct comparison for ACC counterspells, both Thwart and Foil were uncommon. Of course, those are closer to Alliances than they are to the present day, chronologically ( ) and probably the most recent example, Disrupting Shoal, is rare despite the fact that it's pretty terrible. Misdirection is also rare, though its card text tends to be 'rare' a lot more often than "counter target spell" does (cf. Shunt, Redirect).Really the real answer is probably "it'd be justifiable to reprint it at either uncommon or rare and it just comes down to whether Wizards wants to be good or evil-but-less-evil-than-they'd-be-by-not-reprinting-at-all." e: MMA and TNN showed that overall supply is as much or more of a factor as the booster pack percentage. Rare would probably be fine as long as Wizards keeps the retailer throughput going strong. JerryLee fucked around with this message at 17:16 on Feb 13, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:Nobody has justified this besides saying that "it's needed". I tend to think that reprinting something at its former rarity is the default and doesn't have any sort of burden of proof attached to it. As I said, though, they can probably print it at rare and have the 'needed' effect on eternal formats as long as they ensure that your LGS's shelves remains stocked with shipments of the given product for a period of several months. If they decide to do it MMA style and test the waters then it probably wouldn't have any effect. JerryLee fucked around with this message at 17:21 on Feb 13, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2014 17:18
|
|
|
^^^ why would you not just respond to the Merchant's ability like others have been sayingsuicidesteve posted:Quicken -> Planar Cleansing? If you're looking for something like Fog for life loss, no, I'm pretty sure it doesn't exist. An instant saying 'You can't lose life this turn. (Damage causes loss of life.)' would be interesting design space that as far as I'm aware hasn't been explored yet, like you said. They'd probably need a reminder about not being able to pay life either.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:So that he doesn't have it in hand to play last after replaying everything else? Ahh, yeah, that's a pretty good idea if leaving the Merchant on the board for a turn isn't going to mess with your plans in other ways. Good call.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2014 21:01
|
|
|
Zoness posted:Think of it this way - if everyone that played against big shot player's new deck at a GP flickr'd snapshots of that player's hands over the course of the tournament any innate surprise value in running the brew would be lost. Whether or not this is a good thing is up in the air but it is still a thing. And that's the thing - with written stuff it's still fairly restrictive to distribute. Once you take a phone photo there's no way to keep you from tweeting that photo. How is it fairly restrictive? If you actually care enough to be doing it in the first place, posting some text (seven card names at most, usually) isn't that hard.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2014 20:14
|
|
|
Stinky Pit posted:but disseminating match notes is crossing a line and I as a Judge would immediately step in. I'm just curious, which actual rule would you point to as grounds for stepping in, or is it just based on your interpretation of the spirit of what the DCI wants? Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that tweeting what the contents of your opponent's hand were when you thoughtseized them on turn 1 is going to be the DCI's favorite thing ever but if this was actually a thing they intend to prohibit then surely they would have made a floor rule about it, no? And it's entirely possible, for all I know, that they have, which is why I'm asking you.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
Okay, honest question, if the point is that some joe schmuck tweeting 'yo I played Owen Turtenwald and he's playing a new variant with X Y and Z' is damaging to Owen (or whoever), therefore bad, where do feature matches (let alone video matches) play into this? Surely reporting a player's play-by-plays for an entire match is much more damaging still? I mean yes, I get that organized play has a separate interest in feature matches as a tool to promote the game (and I personally am immensely glad of their existence) but putting that aside for a moment, if it's damaging to the outcome of the tournament to show or describe someone's new brew in round 3, surely the harm done is the same regardless of who is doing the reporting? I know they don't print deck lists until relatively late in the tournament for pretty much that reeason and that's probably a good line to draw, but nobody is talking about tweeting exact decklists here and I don't even know how you would mine that information without getting busted for slow play.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2014 21:36
|
|
|
I'm assuming it's okay to write down a few points of information, like what hate cards they brought in after sideboarding?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2014 22:08
|
|
|
New rule, you can take pictures of your opponent's hand but you have to photoshop in a Shiba Inu offering commentary on their deck choice.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2014 00:49
|
|
|
Veyrall posted:Why? It's completely legal, unless their employment contracts specifically bar it, and piss-easy to hide either way. Granted, the possibility of this behavior is not evidence that they do, in fact, engage in this behavior. It is merely one possible explanation as to why Wizards works so hard to keep the secondary market from experiencing any shocks. I guarantee you that anyone in a position to affect corporate policy this way already makes enough money that they don't need to give a poo poo about insider trading, at least not at the level of wizard cardboard rectangles. (Note: People like Maro and Forsythe aren't in such a policy-affecting position, if we take them at their implied word that they would like to roll back or skirt around the obstacles to reprinting but are not in a position to do so. I'm talking about the Hasbro CEOs here.)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
AlternateNu posted:That's not what he's saying. He's saying that a thread about a trading card game (where obviously not everyone has the same resources) is actually arguing about smart phone bullshit by using the point that not everyone has one. This doesn't prove or disprove what you just posted, but it just occurred to me that if you got mailed even one of the old-art foil Wasteland promos back in like 2001, and kept it to this day, it's almost like Wizards gave you a pretty loving good smartphone for free. 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2014 00:59
|
|
|
Veyrall posted:I'll give you that, but people on the lower rungs of the ladder could very well profit by such behavior by insider trading, even if they can't sway reprints to benefit themselves. I'll likewise give you that, but such low-rung people have no opportunities to influence the company to "work so hard" to prop up the secondary market to its current ludicrous heights, which is what I thought you were talking about.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2014 01:20
|
|
|
Gyshall posted:I prefer to Xerox my opponents hand This except I Xerox their literal hand. They're so creeped out, it's like the ultimate psych warfare.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2014 04:50
|
|
|
I have a similar idea involving inscribing my opponent's hand on a golden plate, except then I mount it on a space probe and launch it on a solar escape trajectory so that any aliens who play him in the later rounds will know all about his terrible deck.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2014 05:04
|
|
|
Stinky Pit posted:I'm way more annoyed when a standard card is more than $5, it's a mediocre format and 90% of that 300 dollar standard deck is worthless a year later. Even planeswalkers and poo poo? Even I don't expect hot dollar Standard cards to only be $5 ($15-20 would be reasonable for poo poo like good mythics). BaronVonVaderham posted:Sad to say it's driving me to Legacy...if I'm going to be spending Legacy money anyway, why not. I have some bad news for you if you want to play anything with nonbasic lands in it. Trust me, you aren't spending Legacy money yet.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2014 20:17
|
|
|
demons. posted:m14 is a decent draft format. Even the best core sets aren't as interesting to draft as the expansion sets.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2014 00:25
|
|
|
They could also put a theoretically playable prismatic land or two in the core set, like City of Brass, Grand Coliseum, or Gemstone Mine, or I guess more likely a new land entirely designed to appeal to infants who will shy away from harsh and punishing mechanics like "take a point of damage" or "a limited number of uses." Or maybe Reflecting Pool, that wouldn't be a bad core set staple. I mean, I already think that manabases are way too permissive but that ship ain't coming back to the harbor anytime soon so we might as well go full  with manabases and incentivize color discipline in other ways. Like with Devotion. Which is awesome.edit: Speaking of Unknown Shores, one trend I'd love to see the brakes thrown on is functional reprints with different names in places where there was no actual need to reflavor them (I'm sure Theros has grottoes). JerryLee fucked around with this message at 23:52 on Feb 17, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
A "modern power pack" is sort of on the other extreme from "no reprints at all." A hopefully completely reasonable solution is just "Modern Masters, except we keep it well-stocked on LGS shelves for at least a year, and when it goes out of print we follow it up with another similar product in a year or two." One problem is that Wizards's printing department isn't very nimble. They keep up an excellent throughput of stuff, but when they need to react to new information--e.g., "Modern Masters was a good idea, we should print a bunch more of it"--it's like an oil tanker coming about. Is the problem purely that space on the printers is booked solid and there's noplace else in the world worthy of printing Magic cards? It sure isn't that they need to do design or card layout, at least not for Modern Masters specifically.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2014 01:21
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:They said from the beginning that it was only getting one print run though. They very deliberately undershot on Modern Masters and it was a way smarter move than "print all the cards". Fair enough, I should have spoken more generally of a Modern Masters-like product. Unless they also said specifically that this one wet fart (in terms of supply) was all the injection that Modern staples were getting, ever, in which case I guess I can go ahead and rip the bandaid off my hopes.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2014 01:30
|
|
|
Stinky Pit posted:Wizards isn't going to keep making 250 Million a year constantly re-printing poo poo for a bunch of whiny nerds who are upset they can't have all of the cards they want for a dollar. I wonder if there's a forum where you can have a conversation with people who actually fit this strawman (or anything remotely close to it for that matter) because as far as I know nobody in these threads has said that, not even me.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2014 02:02
|
|
|
Mulletstation posted:New Battle Pack: No Wasteland? Get the hell out.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2014 04:57
|
|
|
I don't think anyone thinks Tarmogoyfs should become $1 or anything but if they full stop do not want to move the needle at all, then they just shouldn't reprint anything. It's not like you can't buy Modern staples at any price, there are plenty of them on SCG or Ebay or whatever. The only reason to reprint them is because you're acknowledging that, while they shouldn't be worthless, the current price is too high. Shocklands and Thoughtseize are excellent examples of what actually happens when you reprint stuff instead of just theorycrafting. They were absolutely poured into the market, relatively speaking, and it just made the price settle out in the reasonable $8-15 range. If they were mythic instead of rare, it might have been $20-40, you know, like good mythics usually are when they're in print. That is a fine place for retailers to be moving singles at. They did not become Weimar era deutschmarks or whatever the usual scary figment of the imagination is. Now, a specifically Modern-only reprint product might require a bit of finetuning of the 'shockland formula' because you don't have Standard sales propping the demand up, but the solution to that is to push Modern more and more. edit: once again, I just checked and SCG has like 80 Tarmogoyfs of various sorts in stock at this very moment. You can go and buy them. Supply qua supply is not and will not soon be the issue, and "increasing supply in such a way so as not to meaningfully affect the price" is a pointless exercise. JerryLee fucked around with this message at 22:26 on Feb 18, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
Different strokes. I like that art so much less than the original. It's technically well done, of course.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2014 05:15
|
|
|
jassi007 posted:Karn woke up and promptly lost the war or some poo poo, vowing to "make it all right" Why oh why is Karn not the protagonist of Magic going forward
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2014 20:04
|
|
|
ScarletBrother posted:Phyrexian mana costed Eldrazi! It'd be awesome (and probably also terrible) to have Phyrexian Eldrazi mana where you have big colorless Eldrazi for which you can pay 2 life per 1 colorless mana for any amount of their mana cost. Potentially cast huge legends starting from turn 1 as long as you can somehow pony up the >20 life required. Yes, I realize this would make EDH poo poo bricks
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2014 21:36
|
|
|
Entropic posted:And if there ever is a movie, none of that lore will show up in it, and five or six nerds are gonna be sooooo mad. It will be me. I will be the nerd who is mad.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2014 21:40
|
|
|
Madmarker posted:This is such a weird mindset for me to see. I mean, Im sure I'm a minority here, but there aren't any particular cards that I have an emotional connection to, yeah I mean some are cool,and I don't want to lose them because they would be expensive to replace but it's like getting emotionally connected to a scrabble tile. I can understand what you're trying to convey when you make that comparison, but it shouldn't be surprising that the scrabble tile to magic card comparison breaks down on any number of levels for most people, so why shouldn't this be one of them?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2014 21:53
|
|
|
^^^ do you ever look in the mirror and think to yourself, "wow, so that's what being wrong looks like"Shavnir posted:I'm working on getting my modern deck to 100 percent Russian. Hard to find is an understatement. How far have you come since GPKC? It was already pretty impressive then.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2014 22:10
|
|
|
Attorney at Funk posted:I think it sometimes when I read another post about how the old card frame looks better I'm actually having a hard time thinking of a forest art that I outright hate. Most basic land is appropriately evocative of something, it's just a question of what you want to go for. This is what comes to mind when I think of an ugly forest, but with a black border it might not be so bad. I really like the Portal Second Age forests. All gnarled and shady and treehouse-y and the artist wasn't concerned with being photorealistic.  It feels like Lorwyn, although it doesn't resemble the actual Lorwyn forest arts that much.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2014 22:30
|
|
|
The new border is objectively (as in, I'm sure you can measure it according to metrics) better for readability, but the old border was better for flavor. More to the point, and I say this a lot but it's true, they threw more babies out with the bathwater than they needed to when they made the transition from old to new. "Huh okay this bit of text can be kind of hard to read sometimes" shouldn't translate into gutting everything except the basic layout.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
tzirean posted:I'm looking forward to the old border and new border camps uniting in their hatred for the M15 border. The new border is a sidegrade but I actually like the fact that they're going to a proprietary font that appears to have at least a bit of flair to it. From what I've seen so far, it captures a bit of what I liked about the old card name font. Overall I'd call the M15 card face a net upgrade for my tastes.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2014 22:40
|
|
|
whydirt posted:Look at this scrub forgetting about continuous artifacts. I'm still mad that Howling Mine was the only one given errata to turn off while tapped. My Meekstones and Winter Orbs. Didn't Winter Orb have the errata for a while, then they went back to printed wording? I think Howling Mine's deal was that it got reprints with the "turns off while tapped" wording and that's why it got grandfathered in.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2014 22:46
|
|
|
whydirt posted:I've always thought it was weird how there was so much variation in color saturation (don't kill me if I'm not using the right printing jargon!) in old frame card faces while the card back has been pretty consistent. Anyone with better knowledge about printing processes have some idea why that might have happened? If I had to take a wild guess it might be because they knew they couldn't afford to print excessively 'marked' card backs, but the fronts were more  and/or a place to try saving on ink costs.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2014 23:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 08:37 |
|
|
I started playing around 1999 but I was already like 16 years old and had progressive parents so it was cool 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2014 23:08
|
|