|
Activation costs are always and forever followed by a colon. Curse of the Cabal has a triggered ability that triggers each upkeep and allows a player to sacrifice a creature as part of it's resolution. It doesn't boil down to an activated ability, it doesn't have an activated ability, it doesn't give players an activated ability. Edit: more generally, anything beginning with "when", "whenever" and "at" is a triggered ability. Fantastic Foreskin fucked around with this message at 17:55 on Mar 28, 2018 |
#
¿
Mar 28, 2018 17:53
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 08:11 |
|
|
myDad posted:That reminds me: Vessel of Nascency lets you pick any permanent card without saying permanent (lists all five). Thought it was odd. I think it's to provide clarity for delirium.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2018 12:56
|
|
|
Gotta love redundant flavor text
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2018 15:37
|
|
|
Thisuck posted:It would be nice if they let you infinite easily for at least phantom drafts. Lol. Wizards will NEVER make it easy to draft for free. That's the money maker that's kept modo going this whole time and the only reason a goodly portion of their player base even buys their products. Making drafting cheap / free would just be shooting themselves in the foot.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2018 02:28
|
|
|
Bulky Bartokomous posted:So I’m pretty new to all this still but is there any reason to worry about Arena killing off MTGO? Maintaining two versions of their digital game (long term) would just be stupid, so most likely they'll run both in parallel for a while; if Arena spend is high enough they'll probably kill off / depreciate MTGO, if not they'll keep it alive while they refactor Arena until they either reach their desired revenue levels or step back from trying to compete in the digital ccg space. Of course, there's some possibility both systems generate enough and different revenue that they keep them both alive, but there's going to be a lot of pushing internally to have this not be the case. If Arena ever reaches card parity MTGO's done for but I don't see that happening within a meaningful timeframe. How they go about depreciating MTGO is another question but I don't have time to write anything up right now. tl;dr I wouldn't sink a whole bunch of money in, but it's probably safe if you just want to play, especially for things other than standard.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2018 13:35
|
|
|
How long do prereleases usually take?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2018 13:46
|
|
|
Packs 2.50-1 They're still 8 card packs, right? Drafts: $10, there's no way they're significantly undercutting existing draft prices without seriously harming their bottom line on a johnny-come-last digital ccg.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2018 18:47
|
|
|
So we've found the real reason for the not-in-the-set promo? And if it's anything like every other digital ccg it won't be craftable until it becomes irrelevant (more irrelevant).
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2018 20:18
|
|
|
The Human Crouton posted:The announcement says they will be crafatable. That's fine then, beyond being stupid in general. $5 or less drafts, infinite at 75% winrate (if I did the math right) is intriguing but BO1 is super high variance. Have they announced anything about how the drafting process will be handled yet? E:^^^ AI drafters are not intriguing.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2018 20:42
|
|
|
moush posted:I think in Eternal you draft against other people, maybe Hex too? Eternal drafts one way, so you get your packs after real people, but you're not really drafting with them. Dunno about hex.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2018 20:49
|
|
|
AlternateNu posted:Uhhh. This is incorrect. The cheapest stronghold diamond is $140. The cheapest FTV on is $450. If they're not selling for those prices it's not a real price. It's the whole reason they rolled out the market price.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2018 17:02
|
|
|
fadam posted:I feel like 90% of the problems with the economy in Arena would be solved by them adding a dust system. I really have no clue why they just wont put something like it in. I mean, they have to keep the earn rate comparable to other dcgs if they want to compete, right? So you should be able to build a deck at the same rate as any other game, just you get to keep the rest of your cards. No guarantee that they'll actually do that though.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2018 16:26
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:How is this a particularly lovely version of it? I'd say it's a vanilla bog standard version of it. Sure, but that wrecks their entire business model unless they price it high enough that no one would buy it. Would you pay $100 a month for unlimited drafts (so, the price of 10 paper drafts) and, if you're the kind of person who would, how much money are they leaving on the table for drafts >10 that you'd pay for otherwise? E: or $50, to peg it to arena
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2018 16:44
|
|
|
Replicator + outcome seems pretty good on it's own. Maybe not good-good but loads of fun.
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2018 13:25
|
|
|
Wizards only brought back core sets because there other attempts at new player onboarding haven't been working. It's not surprising that they're going extra basic. They probably figured that the core set + philosophy of M10 forward alienated new players so they decided to go back to the basic basics for the new set. Plus these are all common, they'll probably make some interesting rares as a. there aren't enough of them to overwhelm new players and b. everyone loves a little spice.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2018 23:46
|
|
|
little munchkin posted:*a business model built on artificial scarcity has trouble attracting new customers, also a large influx of cheaper alternatives have popped up for the first time* I don't think you can even call the scarcity of any in-print card artificial. The supply of any given card is infinite while its in print, retailers will open product continuously as long as there's demand, and with equal chances to get any given rare an infinite number of each will opened and made available on the market. But there's a price floor on a set of cards as the retailers opening product have to recoup their costs, Wizards isn't/can't just give the cards away. Typically, this is also the price ceiling, as there's enough competition selling identical products that it takes some very special circumstances to be competitive while selling above the minimum viable price. So a set of cards (easiest thought of here as one of every card in a set) has a value somewhere between the wholesale price and MSRP of the amount of sealed product it takes to open that set, and all of the cards in that set have to share the value. Obviously, demand for the cards in the set will be uneven, as people purchasing cards on the market typically want the most competitive cards1 so those cards receive a disproportionate amount of demand and thus command a price according to their demand ratio. Whether the value of a given card in set matters to Wizards depends on the position of the set within standard. If there's no demand for the cards retailers won't open product, but the closer to even the distribution of standard playable cards becomes between sets, the less incentive Wizards has to care about the value of any given card as they are not competing with themselves in that scenario. We also know that they're capable of actively making cards that will be dominant in standard, but also that if they go too far in this direction it hurts the demand for standard and backfires on them. Relatedly, we know that besides 'obviously pushed' they're not great at knowing which cards will be good and therefore in high demand. So they are incentivized to build power levels slightly each set to increase demand for the new things, but they don't have the skill to do so subtly with any accuracy, and they also know that if the power level gets too high people stop playing / demand falls. Furthermore, if they have to print a low power set to reset standard it won't be popular, so ultimately its in Wizards best interest to keep power levels roughly consistent between sets. As established, if they can achieve this they have no reason to care about demand for any given card in the set and thus relatively small incentive to make any given card actively better than the others, though it will always be the case that some cards are better than others as a function of how TCGs work. So with infinite supply and no strong reasons for Wizards to influence demand, we can conclude that the price of a card in standard is a function of real demand by players and the price floor set by Wizards / distributors. (They could cut their margins to lower this floor, but at $4/pack there's not a whole lot of room to play with). The fact that they have competition now has changed, but also makes it more important that they can capture new players, as pretty much all of their competitors have much simpler rules to begin with, and all of the interactions are handled by computers, making knowing the rules unnecessary to play. Sickening posted:Core sets should be the easiest sets to create. You have an infinite number of cards to choose from that already exist with complete freedom to make new ones to fit the gaps. Have you ever seen people try to learn to play Magic, especially without someone who knows the rules handy? Hell, there are people who care enough to post in this thread that don't know the rules. New core sets (I'm betting) are more like Portal 4.0 than anything else. Hopefully they'll release a draft product contemporaneously, but beyond the side effect of putting hard to flavor cards into standard, the product probably just isn't intended for you, or anyone else in this thread. Not that its ever worked before, but I really don't have a good answer for this one, and after 25 years, neither do they, 1Also, wizards makes all of their product readily available for free, you can go print off all the copies of $Chase_rare from Gatherer (or somewhere better) you want, the only thing you need their actual product for is to play in the tournaments they sponsor. Or if your friends only let each other play with real cards, which they all do, but I'm not sure Wizards can be blamed for that.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2018 02:06
|
|
|
Sickening posted:That product doesn't belong as major set as it will be a financial turd. Portal, if tried today, would be a loving disaster. People not buying was actually one of Maro's selling points for bringing back core sets. "Fourth, it helped with main set fatigue. Under the old system, there were just three major releases and a core set. Many players played with and enjoyed the core set, but it was an opt-in experience. If a player had enough with the main three sets, they didn't necessarily have to care about the core set." "Probably the biggest change about the new core set is a philosophy in how we think about it. In the past, we stuck the core set on equal footing with the other three major sets, but with its return we're going to treat it differently. It has a different purpose, different priorities, and it's going to be designed with a different approach. As such, we're not going to treat it as if it's just like the main three expansions." https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/making-magic/metamorphosis-2-0-2017-06-12
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2018 02:47
|
|
|
Owlbear Camus posted:I would rather get to the next draw step to see if I topdeck my out, and moreover to the next game where I'm not getting shut out than waste my own time by wasting my opponent's. The idea is to frustrate you enough that you'll concede rather than wait for it to play out.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2018 20:48
|
|
|
Marketing New Brain posted:I don’t have a particular desire to go back to Lorwyn but ‘our focus group numbers’ being the driving force for where the creative and design teams decide what planes to visit seems dumb as hell. You learn more from your failures than your successes, it’s an oppertunity to do it again and improve it. Maro: "Hey boss, we did this thing that nobody liked, but we think we know how to do it better this time, can we use the same branding as the thing nobody liked?" Boss: "No"
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2018 22:44
|
|
|
Considering the costs involved in putting out a magic set, and the fact that they have carte blanche to go with any setting they can think of, I have to imagine anyone who okays starting on the back foot quickly finds themselves out of a job if it doesn't work out.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2018 00:51
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure the flavor wasn't a hit, but most of the issues I've heard they have with it are mechanical. The calculus on not returning is much simpler though: Some people didn't like Lorwyn so if they see Lorwyn Again the concern is they won't buy it, whereas they would buy Another World, and so will the people who liked Lorwyn. Call it cowardly, but each set has to cover salaries and operating expenses at wizards for a quarter, translation, production, and distribution, and live up to Hasbro's profit expectations. This is one area where they're going to be extremely conservative.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2018 02:50
|
|
|
Devor posted:Is the "put" from partner keyword a search? It doesn't say search. Way to avoid hosing by the fun police who are playing aven mindcensor? It's reminder text, so.. maybe? It could also just be to save space.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2018 16:19
|
|
|
Remember the Ravnica you love? Have a different Ravinca. "Theatrical combination of danger and flamboyance" isn't quite "suicidal violence orgy". Gruul are now street samurai. Dimir are dumb.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2018 02:08
|
|
|
Eh, you could intentionally stay land light and have your teammate help you cast assist spells to trigger it a couple times (or just hope they can carry the team for a couple turns), and then just draw gas the rest of the game + have the lands for it. Similarly, assist gives Path a bigger downside than usual because it's potentially helping to cast two hands worth of spells.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2018 15:55
|
|
|
Truely indistinguishable counterfeits would be a big deal, as once any card becomes available print-to-order (in sets of 500 or whatever) the bottom falls out of the singles market that's (tenuously) keeping most game stores afloat. Losing Magic would end most LGSs, which would then have reprocussions on organized play. Where this puts Wizards I'm not sure, I doubt it effects the big box buyers, and you'd still need real product for limited, but much worse off for sure. Also, saying you're for counterfeits that aren't being use to scam anybody is, uh, fine, but it's the potential value in the scamming that drives the market for these things (as evidenced by the efforts to make them indistinguishable), the ones that people buy for their cube or whatever are incidental. Fantastic Foreskin fucked around with this message at 05:31 on May 24, 2018 |
|
#
¿
May 24, 2018 05:29
|
|
|
Who's firing sanctioned legacy? That is, if people want to play legacy what's stopping them from sleeving scryfall print-outs? And the notion that counterfeiters are improving so that they can provide tournament playable product falls flat in the face of the counterfeit expeditions and rl cards for which almost no tournaments exist. They're targeting high value cards because people want to buy those cards to sell them to the unwitting.
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2018 06:11
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:There are some reasonable anti-counterfeit arguments here but lol at at least one person unironically saying "b-but what about poor plucky hasbro's bottom line?" This is a 1200 page thread dedicated to a Hasbro product. Everyone here is a Hasbro stooge.
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2018 06:44
|
|
|
Star Man posted:I've got nothing against someone wanting to work for Wizards. Because they don't take applications? Not for this job, anyways.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2018 21:35
|
|
|
Also consider that no one else will ever pay you to design Magic cards, so it's not like you're signing over things that are otherwise monitarily valuable.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2018 22:06
|
|
|
And yet, she is (or was) in charge of making sure cards fit their concept. Not that it didn't strike me as odd too, but Kamigawa was 14 years ago, and the rest of the enchantments are even older. I think it's pretty safe to say shrines aren't enchantments anymore, and are strangely underrepresented in Magic.
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2018 01:26
|
|
|
I'd say criticizing the card name on an art-bound hole filling exercise involving non-employees applying for a non-creative role is a bad way to judge a contest, but her critique was less "doesn't pay attention to Magic" and more "is the person who gets to decide these things". E: also Luxa River Shrine as the only recently printed shrine. Seriously, these things are everywhere in fantasy, how does mtg just not have any? Fantastic Foreskin fucked around with this message at 01:37 on May 30, 2018 |
|
#
¿
May 30, 2018 01:35
|
|
|
Marketing New Brain posted:Haha I don't care how good they end up making the UI the game will never attract new players if it's much more expensive than Hearthstone. It seems like they don't realize they're massively behind and playing catch up in the digital card game market, and while they may be able to squeeze people in paper, there's a ton of competition in this market. First let's get a phone app, then let's talk about competing in the digital market. Seriously, the fact that the alternatives ate FTP is convenient, but the real reason I've played them is that I can carry them with me.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2018 06:19
|
|
|
Lol if you ever thought arena was going to be FTP friendly. It wasn't made to fix MTGO, it was made because Wizards saw the whale money other FTP games were getting and said "me too".
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2018 16:27
|
|
|
They're competing with themselves there. Who would buy packs if you could just get everything at a fixed price? They'd either hemmorage money or price it too high to be relevant.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2018 19:20
|
|
|
Poor choice of words. They'd make less money than they do by selling packs, ergo, they'll never offer a subscription to cards.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2018 19:29
|
|
|
How many of Magics recent problems have been caused by their refusal to let cards have any negative effect on the person that plays them? Like, would Chainwhirler be ok if it hit it's owners stuff too?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2018 14:56
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:$700 Seas are going to make me sell out of Legacy... $2800 question, are duals jumping because of mtgfinance thinking they're the safest bet out there and driving up the price, or has the surge in playerbase attracted people with a bunch of money who've decided they want to play legacy because they have a bunch of money and they're offering ever higher bids to get the duals out of the hands of the poors?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2018 16:34
|
|
|
ShaneB posted:The former. Where do people dumb enough to mtgfinance get the kind of spare cash to spec on inflated duals? (J/k I know it's not spare cash, a bunch of neckbeards have their life savings tied up in a stack of cardboard because it's 'their job')
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2018 16:40
|
|
|
'Digital art' gets scapegoated as much as Maro, but I'm pretty sure the (poorly phrased) complaints are more with art direction than anything. Brand has been pushing for a not-quite photorealism that reads very flat, and it gets called out for being 'digital' as it suppresses the more physical aspects of the painting itself. Between the sagas and some knockout art in this set hopefully were starting to see some cracks in their chosen style, but im not holding my breath. (Tez is awesome, btw)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2018 16:28
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 08:11 |
|
|
How do you as an artist go about making 12 figures readable in a, what, 2"x3" frame? A lot of the older artist interviews talk about the need to keep things simple due to the constraints at card size, but this seems to have gone out the window at some point.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2018 17:48
|
|