|
I know when you're talking about modern alternate art for cards from the early 00s that the chances of it being an actual upgrade go down, but it's still pretty funny how the first two alt arts in that article are way dumber than their originals
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 15:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 23:01 |
|
|
suicidesteve posted:I guess this confirms my ridiculous theory that he had an affair with Gaby! Yeah, I can only hope that whatever it is, it isn't/wasn't too acrimonious, and the kid is all right.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2017 04:56
|
|
|
mandatory lesbian posted:far more powerful means playable Yeah, "powerful" feels like an odd way of putting it, since at its heart Dissolve doesn't do anything that's wildly stronger on a mechanical level than any other hard counter, it just has a little extra rider that adds half a card's worth of value so that it's, like you said, playable.' Cryptic Command is powerful. Dissolve is a counterspell that you don't actively feel bad about putting in your deck.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2017 02:00
|
|
|
Pontius Pilate posted:They should be far more liberal with slapping scry 1 on cards. It does wonders for smoothing out the worst part of magic. Half-ironic suggestion: Bring back Clash instead. 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2017 04:50
|
|
|
TheKingofSprings posted:They really should be super gung-ho about printing good answers because those go a long way towards covering up any major gently caress-ups they do provided they're distributed relatively evenly. Well, the obvious counterargument is "what happens when the answer becomes the fuckup?" but practically speaking they'd probably have to go a long way to get to that
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2017 19:18
|
|
|
Why is Jackal its own creature type now? I mean it's not a completely indefensible idea in a vacuum but after 20 years of hounds maybe consistency is a virtue
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2017 18:07
|
|
|
dragon enthusiast posted:i cant identify with and/or jerk off to them otherwise new_slivers.txt
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2017 04:09
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:This is basically what I think they should have done. Plus getting rid of the stupid text; my 5 min. MS paint of your 5 min. MS paint: Add some colored mana symbols (in the same desaturated/painterly blue as the other blues on the card), and maybe use the same font in the name and typeline as in the textbox (seriously, it looks Egyptian enough) and I think we're golden.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2017 23:11
|
|
|
I have to admit that I'm a little bit tilted, since 'awesome not-Egypt block' has been on my Magical wishlist since basically the early 00s, and now that it's here, almost 90% of what I've seen so far feels like Aaron Forsythe leaving a bag of flaming I acknowledge that the crimes against visual design that are Dawn/Dusk and the Invocations aren't necessarily representative of the quality of the set as a whole, but still
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2017 23:52
|
|
|
Core Magic product with dudes embracing in the art 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 04:32
|
|
|
Siivola posted:I thought all the hate for the new story was just goons being goons, but no. It's just not good. You do if you're some of the textual roleplayers I've seen in places like WoW  Which actually fits perfectly with how poorly conceived and defined some of the characters are.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 08:54
|
|
|
TheKingofSprings posted:That cat seems very strong. Yeah. Luckily it only has 3 toughness, so Lightning Strike will be able to answer it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 22:26
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Gifts Ungiven is a good example of a case where they simply added some helpful clarity with the updated wording and didn't break any previously existing interactions or insult anyone's intelligence too much.Jabor posted:Exactly. Would have been much better. I mean, there's already reminder text to clue you in that cycling is discarding. It just happens to be the cycling reminder text. I don't really think asking people to correlate a key word on two separate cards is asking for the moon on a plate, cognitively speaking JerryLee fucked around with this message at 04:57 on Apr 4, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 04:54
|
|
|
I know they've been playing fast and loose with this ever since Alpha, but a statline of 2/2 still seems small for what's essentially (going by the art) a 20 foot tall stone golem
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 13:57
|
|
|
Firebatgyro posted:I mean it would be broken as hell if you gave it vigilance otherwise I mean when a creature has Elvish Ranger's statline and has to attack to get its benefit I feel like there's a very large amount of counterplay there, even if in theory it could go infinite with some sort of two-card combo
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 17:59
|
|
|
Back//Basics I know about Back to Basics
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2017 05:10
|
|
|
C-Euro posted:Is the translation off, or does it get around countermagic? It only talks about being cast, it doesn't sound like it needs to resolve to actually do anything. You get the "put back in library" on casting. What makes you think that? It's part of the resolution of the spell just like everything else. Now, the check for whether you cast one earlier in the game, that won't care whether or not the prior one(s) was countered. But the one that wins you the game definitely needs to get through in order to, well, win you the game.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2017 14:00
|
|
|
little munchkin posted:yea 7 mana is usually a deal-breaker for strong cards that affect the board, let alone a card that takes 7 more turns to have an impact Yeah. Especially in Limited, "wins the game in 7 turns if left unanswered" is not an uncommon resume for a 4 or 5 mana card to have, let alone 7. The one thing about this card is that the potential answers to it are much narrower (can't block it or remove it) but it also doesn't affect the board so that's probably still not a net positive
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2017 14:19
|
|
|
Count Bleck posted:My favorite part of Eldritch Moon is that the main plot point of the set is no longer allowed to be played in Standard. They locked her away in the moon. Flavor checks out.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2017 18:08
|
|
|
The great thing is that regardless of how it actually works, there will be room for MTGO to gently caress it up somehow!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
Hellsau posted:I'm exceedingly annoyed that Nagas are "Naga [CLASS]" instead of "Snake [CLASS]" when Leonin are "Cat [CLASS]". As I mentioned back several pages now, I'm tilted that jackals are now Jackals when Hound was a perfectly fine approximation. If only because this dashes my hope of combining Amonkhet with Tarkir cards for doggo tribal
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2017 06:16
|
|
|
Pretty hosed up for a baby to have garbage on its dick. Someone should call CPS.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2017 23:54
|
|
|
Pontius Pilate posted:A side grade to urza's armor? Why? Doesn't combo with Pestilence, it's garbage
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2017 02:11
|
|
|
clamiam45 posted:This flavor text is saying he knows things that only Kefnet knows? You can parse it as "The initiates believe it possesses secrets, but they're wrong; in reality only Kefnet knows those secrets," which isn't actually a contradiction but is still awkward enough that I chalk it up to Bad Flavor Text Writing rather than any deliberate attempt to say something so convoluted
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2017 16:27
|
|
|
Count Bleck posted:You know what sounds like a Cool and Good thing you can do? Isn't that pretty win-more, though?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2017 05:48
|
|
|
Soul Glo posted:Lay Claim costs 7, so, uh... Well, I mean, it'll never be sitting in your hand unless you want it to be.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2017 05:25
|
|
|
Rip_Van_Winkle posted:love this beetle and his big ol hat I'm expecting so many bad players to not recognize/understand that the attack trigger doesn't need to have a counter to remove in order to place a counter
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2017 19:13
|
|
|
St0rmD posted:And as a result I know I'm not the only person who first read these cards and thought "woah does this mean cycling actually triggers it twice?" They could actually have sidestepped the awkwardness and incorporated some interesting design space if they'd done something like "Whenever you discard a card, [do X]. If the discard was to activate cycling, [get a bonus effect of some sort]." e: What I'm really wondering about this new shift in templating philosophy is how they deal with this perceived problem on cards in other sets/products. It's not like they can build a walled garden around sets that include cycling to ensure that the virgin minds of new casual players never have to deal with the existence of Waste Not, Liliana's Caress (Or, god forbid, Megrim) in a game where some other player wants to cycle cards. Are all those cards in the future going to have this templating? Obviously not (please don't prove me wrong, Wizards) but that just points out how silly it is in the first place-- either it's necessary or it's not. JerryLee fucked around with this message at 21:49 on Apr 14, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2017 21:42
|
|
|
Tubgoat posted:In their defense, I did have one opponent try to redirect my Cranial Plating equip to his Spellskite. His and the other fellow's excuse was "no one plays Affinity here." Unless you were using exactly the Commander 2016 printing, Cranial Plating has the equip reminder text on it, so it should have been a very quick problem to solve. And that leads to a point that needs to be made-- it's not a problem for someone's very first mental model of an ability or interaction to have a few things wrong with it, as your Spellskite opponent's did. What's a problem is if they can't read the reminder text, or if that reminder text has no permanence in their mind as they take their eyes off Card A and try to figure out whether/how it interacts with Card B.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2017 21:53
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 23:01 |
|
|
Dr. Stab posted:I think it's sort of bonkers that experienced players don't know that you can't equip your opponent's creatures. The more likely scenario is that they don't understand spellskite. Because people really don't understand spellskite. I once witnessed a game at a Grand Prix where a Splinter Twin player had Kiki + Exarch on the board but didn't go for the combo because his opponent had a Spellskite out. RTFC.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2017 22:32
|
|