|
Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:This isn't the kind of sweeping change they make in a small set to support at most two-dozen cards. Well, it makes sense from an overall game perspective to split the idea of colorless and generic mana, though it's a pretty big visual change for such a small change to comprehension of cards. It seems like one of those "If we could start magic over" ideas rather than a thing that they could actually change now.
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 04:51
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 10:53 |
|
|
Looking at the art, it seems that the wastes are somehow tied to kozilek plot wise, so the big mechanical change halfway through the block could be meant to reinforce some big plot change that is happening alongside them.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 05:22
|
|
|
Thor-Stryker posted:Is Menace an evergreen word? Why would they print a standard playable card with no reminder text. (And how ugly would Koz be with the text shoved in there?) Yes. It's a mythic.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 15:31
|
|
|
Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:Then why does a land produce ♦? Because that's the colorless symbol now.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:I don't think it does. The diamond just looks better, and fits the aesthetic of full art lands better, than a big number 1. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
Count Bleck posted:Watch, if Wastes are real, our next 5 Fetches are going to be Search for a Wastes or [Color]. No, becuase nobody would actually want to play wastes in constructed.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 18:13
|
|
|
The Human Crouton posted:I can see having a ♦ cost on cards to represent that it must be paid with colorless mana, but why have lands make ♦ when (1) is the same thing? The thinking is that the diamond replaces {1} in those cases. If they introduce this symbol as "the colorless symbol" and say that it functions in the same way as "the red symbol" it makes sense.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 18:31
|
|
|
Zoness posted:I mean it's all speculation because there's not really strong evidence, hopes aside, for whether diamond mana is Not any colorless-only source, but actually any colorless mana at all.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
PJOmega posted:So spoiler talk aside. I've stumbled onto the makings of a fun little format when trying to teach draft archetypes for BFZ. So I get to play 24 rares?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2015 17:02
|
|
|
Niton posted:Has Rogue Deck Building Gone Too Far?? This deck seems like it would be better without helix pinnacle and just won with lands.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2015 04:29
|
|
|
PJOmega posted:Wasn't there a knowledge pool freezout deck in Standard when INN was legal? Could have sworn I played it using whatever the Rule of Law curse was. This combo was in standard for a long time. Went from Curse of Exhaustion/Knowledge Pool to Possibility Storm/Eidolon of Rhetoric.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2015 04:37
|
|
|
Mikujin posted:How do we handle conspiracies in a constructed environment? 313.2. At the start of a game, before decks are shuffled, each player may put any number of conspiracy cards from his or her sideboard into the command zone. Conspiracy cards with hidden agenda are put into the command zone face down. (See rule 702.105, “Hidden Agenda.”) e: The only really ambiguous card is Worldknit. Card Pool is not a term defined outside of limited
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2015 03:13
|
|
|
Exile wasn't a word on magic cards until 2009.mandatory lesbian posted:i like looking at old alpha/beta cards and trying to figure out the oracle text cause i don't think any of them have the same text in paper and online  figure this one out.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2015 15:53
|
|
|
Count Bleck posted:"pile shuffle in the shape of a heart in order to appease the Value Gods." Which rules are these?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
Count Bleck posted:Had a judge tell me that in order for it to be considered a 'real' cut of the deck you have to move at least 7 cards. Nothing in the rules say anything about cutting the deck. The MTR says that you have to present your deck to your opponent for additional shuffling. That's it
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2015 21:49
|
|
|
alansmithee posted:Aren't you only allowed to miss beneficial triggers though, and can't beneficial change? I seem to recall some discussion about forgetting bob's trigger when you're low vs. when you're not or something. That was a policy that was in place for a very short time a few years ago. It has since evolved into the present policy.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
alansmithee posted:I guess I'm confused then, I know they were talking yesterday about one of the outs for the storm player in the semifinals being to put his opponent within range of dying to confidant, couldn't he just "forget" that trigger then? It's your job to keep track of your own triggers. Your opponent doesn't have to (though they can). Intentionally "forgetting" your triggers is cheating and will get you disqualified.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2015 15:57
|
|
|
They should print "Threshold -- This card gets worse" I think that works well with mill and flashback.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2015 17:08
|
|
|
Most reminder text is actually wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2015 17:19
|
|
|
Serperoth posted:I was gonna say that, it would be a neat effect. But I doubt we'll see it, because feelbads. Switch the wording around to turn feelbads into feelgoods. "As long as you have 6 or fewer cards in your graveyard, this card is better"
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:It has two keywords, one of which is evergreen. It also has seven lines of text.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2015 22:41
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:So did Innistrad's werewolves, and every Bestow creature. Yes they did. Those cards were also complicated. The difference is that TSP was full of mechanics like that, while those sets really just had the one. That's really what NWO is all about. Players want cool new things, but there's a limit when learning new things stops being fun and starts being taxing. e: also the asfan of werewolves was super low due to exactly one of the cards in the pack being a flip card. Dr. Stab fucked around with this message at 22:54 on Dec 2, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2015 22:50
|
|
|
Zoness posted:In what way is a casual player -necessarily- someone who doesn't like reading cards? Reading cards is cool and fun, but if you have to stop to parse every single card in the pack, it becomes not fun. It's about balance.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:Thing is, you ought to only have to fully parse Suspend once. That's the upside of a keyword, in theory. Yeah, that's fine. There's nothing inherently wrong with suspend. It could be a little bit simpler, but that's not the main issue. The real issue was to do with TSP as a whole, a problem to which mechanics like suspend contributed.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2015 23:32
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:Fair enough, I got confused and thought we were still focusing on suspend! New players still expect the cards to do something. If they know that a card does a thing, but not why it does a thing, that's not fun. You need to understand basically everything ichor slick does in order to make sense of it. No player is content to read a card and think "oh it has a random mishmash of disparate abilities, that's cool." They want to give it a purpose. Look at a maro favorite in rescue from the underworld. That's a card that does a bunch of things and has a bunch of words on it, but you can read it and think "oh it gets me my guy back in a flavourful way" and then you're done thinking about it, but there's still lots more to discover about the card beyond that.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2015 01:45
|
|
|
BizarroAzrael posted:A lot of bellyaching on Reddit about the mythic rarity level, all asserting what it "should" be and how it's awful powerful cards get printed there. Or weak cards. First, that's not how math works. Second, the easiest way to calculate it is to look at how they are printed on the sheet. You are twice as likely to get a given rare over a given mythic because each rare is on the sheet twice, and each mythic once.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2015 15:52
|
|
|
Terrible Horse posted:Yeah all the recent delve cards had this. People saw Cruise as "Ancestral, if you get really super lucky" rather than "a pushed Inspiration or Divination that is sometimes Ancestral" They were fine in standard, and I think that's all R&D really cares about. They don't really want old cards dictating what they can put in standard, and legacy and modern are big boys who can take care of themselves.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2015 23:45
|
|
|
I don't think lsv rage does anything.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:Wouldn't it just say "When you cast this spell, no other spells can be cast until it resolves" or something? Again, "when" has a special meaning in magic. It means it's a triggered ability, which means that you could respond to it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2015 16:57
|
|
|
Sickening posted:Making your game worse to cater to these people is also not a great move. Finding the most understandable wording for the reminder text for an ability is not "making your game worse"
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2015 18:22
|
|
|
stinkles1112 posted:I genuinely have no idea how you could word Split Second without using either "stack" or "resolves" without it being a brick of text "Players can't respond to this spell by casting spells or activating abilities"
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
I actually prefer the "until this resolves" wording rather than that one, because you could end up with the interpretation where, say, if an ability triggers from you casting the spell, then players could "respond to" that ability.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2015 20:34
|
|
|
And people have a conception of what it means to respond to things even if they don't know that there exists a stack and when a player casts a spell it is put on the stack, after which there is a round of priority during which players can add additional objects to the stack.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2015 21:18
|
|
|
End of Life Guy posted:Speaking of convoke reminder text, they're gonna have to re-do it again now that generic mana is different than colorless. No, it still works exactly as is.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2015 21:49
|
|
|
That's a thing that doesn't belong in the reminder text because it cannot possibly matter whether it works that way or not. e:The only way it could matter is if OGW has a "spells cost D more" effect that affects your convoke spell, and then only in the conjunction of those two effects does it matter. Dr. Stab fucked around with this message at 21:57 on Dec 8, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2015 21:54
|
|
|
Lieutenant Centaur posted:No, I can't give you an example. Maybe I'm stupid and don't understand it like some others. You need to pay 10, 2 of which must be colorless. Same as if it cost 8BB. You'd need to pay 10, two of which much be black. e: You can't pay for new Kozilek with UUUUUWWWWW, while you can do that with old Kozilek. Dr. Stab fucked around with this message at 22:39 on Dec 8, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2015 22:37
|
|
|
Lieutenant Centaur posted:It further complicates the game for no real long term benefit. I don't really think it futher complicates the game. Think of it as two parts: First: They are adding a colorless mana symbol. This is a sweeping change across all of magic Second: Special cards will require colorless mana in their costs. This is an OGW thing. The first one is about making the game more easy to learn. Now when you see that you have a card that costs {1} and a land that makes {R} and an artifact that makes {1}, you're inclined to think that you need to use the {1} to pay for the {1}, because that's how it works with other things. Changing this removes a special exception that you have to learn that this one symbol means two things in two different places. Now there's a symbol for each of them. The second one is just a minor thing that isn't really designed for long term benefit. It's just a thing that you can do now that you have the first.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2015 23:06
|
|
|
Entropic posted:The biggest problem with Split Second is people assuming you can cast a split second card any time they can cast an Instant, even if the card is a Sorcery or an Enchantment without flash. I think this comes from a deeper issue people have with understanding how spells work. They think of things in terms of "speed." An instant is faster than a sorcery, and an interrupt is faster than an instant.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2015 23:08
|
|
|
I can see it being like hybrid mana in that it's very low-impact in terms of comprehension complexity. But it does have less places where it can go, as it needs a lot more support from the set in order to work.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2015 23:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 10:53 |
|
|
Cernunnos posted:Spells with multiple targets don't fizzle when one of them is removed/becomes illegal. Only spells with a single target fizzle when their target is removed. Yeah that's exactly what he was saying.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2015 23:40
|
|