Magic: the Gathering: Faithless Posting

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > Magic: the Gathering: Faithless Posting

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Yo this isn't my creation, but I opened 2 Underrealm Liches in Arena and had a bunch of Dominaria, so this deck was thrown together and is an absolute blast to play. It feels like little kid Magic, where you're just playing big dumb creatures and big dumb spells, but it works.

# ¿ Feb 19, 2019 13:39

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 5, 2024 00:29

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

TheChirurgeon posted:

Stores have always just ignored MSRP when it made sense for them. Both in doing discounts for boxes to stay competitive and raising the prices for boosters of OOP sets.

also raising the prices to astronomical levels on FTV sets

# ¿ Feb 19, 2019 17:28

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

rkajdi posted:

I mean, if the prices on the cards in the set exceed the retail price, isn't this exactly what you do?

Realistically, if they printed enough this wouldn't happen. But this argument has been had 3000 times in these threads so let's not

# ¿ Feb 19, 2019 18:08

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

I want a common Walker whose gimmick is illusions, where you can put any number of them in your deck and on the battlefield, all his Loyalty abilities are +0, and all dependent on how many copies of himself are on the board.

# ¿ Mar 6, 2019 14:55

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

admanb posted:

That's kind of the point of the polls, yes.

They already have marketing data and consumer survey data that hits a broad swath of players. Maro's polls are targeted at people who are all up in Magic. There is value in that. Whether it's enough value to justify a return to those planes I have no idea.

People want to see Lorwyn and Kamigawa in sets that aren't tedious garbage. You can like the plane and hate the sets that came out of it

That being said, I'd be fine with no more Ravnica sets for at least 5 years

# ¿ Mar 11, 2019 19:01

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

ShadeofBlue posted:

It’s this. None of the MtG novels are good enough to be worth reading on their own merits. The Thran and Brother’s War are alright if you care about the lore, though. I can’t really remember the other Urza books.

The OG Ravnica trilogy was all right if for no other reason than it did some decent world-building using a story that wasn't about a Planswalker but rather a Boros beat cop.

# ¿ Mar 12, 2019 02:11

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Yawgmoth posted:

"lol get hosed modern players" I guess, huh.

Modern doesn't make them money

# ¿ Mar 13, 2019 01:35

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

evilweasel posted:

they're printing modern horizons this year

Modern Horizons is essentially a new Standard set in terms of new cards put into boosters.

# ¿ Mar 13, 2019 01:58

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Oh poo poo is it Rare Redraft chat time? Chaos Reigns

It's a loving scam btw

# ¿ Mar 13, 2019 20:13

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

"Hmm is there a way I can take the already low EV of cracking packs and make it lower for the average player?"

# ¿ Mar 13, 2019 20:24

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Barry Shitpeas posted:

If you pull 3 unplayable/bulk rares then redrafting is a net positive for you even if you come last

Only if there are more than X cards in the pool that don't match that criteria where X is the number of players minus 1

# ¿ Mar 14, 2019 16:04

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Every time someone says EV in this thread they should be required to post the Bill Filmaff video

https://youtu.be/Xf0IcYY_O28

# ¿ Mar 18, 2019 20:28

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Jesus can we go back to rare redraft chat

# ¿ Mar 19, 2019 00:03

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

As someone who managed a LGS a lifetime ago, IDing always bugged me on a personal level because it's so against the spirit of competition to me. It feels like the players are playing the tournament instead of playing the game. That being said, I have no idea why someone would expect the type of nerd who likes CCGs to not game the tournament format in such a way.

# ¿ Mar 19, 2019 10:02

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

ChromiumCrush posted:

Was there anything on the line, because playing Poker without putting something on the line doesn't make any sense at all.

Yeah, I love the game of poker, but wagering is an integral part of the game and if wagers aren't worth anything then what is the point?

# ¿ Mar 19, 2019 19:44

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

MURPHAGATOR! posted:

Can always just play with chips that dont have real money behind them. All the poker mentality still works even if the biggest stack gets to say they won.

Or, you know, the game is more of an excuse to get together with buddies than to actually play serious poker.

You can easily point to EDH as a completely different way to play Magic, too. That doesnt invalidate it as a way to spend time

But wagering isn't part of the game of Magic. It is for poker. If the chips aren't worth anything, who cares? 50 "points" is the same as 1 "point"

Edit: The social aspects like wagering and bluffing/trying to get people to bet the way you want is most of the game, you could argue.

Ate My Balls Redux fucked around with this message at 19:56 on Mar 19, 2019

# ¿ Mar 19, 2019 19:53

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

admanb posted:

You guys do know that tournament poker isn't played with each chip representing real money changing hands, right?

You can play poker for 1st/2nd/3rd place and it doesn't break the game just because a chip isn't worth 10 cents.

Right, but money is on the line, so each "unit" is representative of a fraction of your initial wager.

If there is nothing of value on the line, there's no reason to not play almost every hand.

# ¿ Mar 19, 2019 20:01

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Ante for Magic is silly anyhow. More likely to wager a basic land than anything of value

# ¿ Mar 19, 2019 20:04

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

admanb posted:

You can still play to win even if there's no cash prize.

Why? The betting IS the game.

# ¿ Mar 19, 2019 20:14

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Fuzzy Mammal posted:

Holy poo poo you're obtuse. Why? For position between the entrants. First place is still first place even if there's no money involved m

Oh word? I didn't understand that the person who came in first is in first place.

If you're not betting SOMETHING of value, you're not playing poker. People play completely differently when nothing is at stake because the wagering is a key factor. They play hands they shouldn't play, they stay in when they should cut "losses", etc.

# ¿ Mar 19, 2019 20:30

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

admanb posted:

Then the same thing is true for literally every game we play without a wager on it.

No because wagering isn't a part of every game. You can bet on the outcome of a game, but you don't bet midround on things happening

# ¿ Mar 19, 2019 20:33

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

admanb posted:

You're not betting on anything when you're playing tournament-style poker. There's no real money involved!

That's true, the winner wins absolutely nothing and paid nothing to be there!

# ¿ Mar 19, 2019 20:37

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

admanb posted:

Correct. "You can bet on the outcome of a game, but you don't bet midround on things happening" is an accurate statement for tournament poker.

Psst the things you are betting are percentages of your buy in

# ¿ Mar 19, 2019 20:40

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

admanb posted:

That's... not even remotely accurate. You can't pay more in to get more things to bet. You can't cash out of a game. Your pay out at the end isn't based on how many chips you have. Your buy in and your potential pay out are entirely disconnected from the resources you use to win or lose the event.

Lol no one tell this guy about tournaments where you can buy back in

# ¿ Mar 19, 2019 20:45

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Yawgmoth posted:

Same thing that is "on the line" in any game of kitchen table magic: the knowledge that you played the game well and the intrinsic rewards that a job well done gives you.
Are you totally incapable of understanding the concept of "chips are a resource, object is to get the most chips from other players, game offers multiple avenues to that end" without assigning said chips some value outside the game? That you can in fact just play the game and enjoy the strategy and competition of it all without someone winning/losing something of importance?
Ah, I see the answer is a resounding "no" then.

LOL I like how people are acting like I just don't UNDERSTAND the concept of playing for imaginary points, as though I haven't addressed it multiple times

# ¿ Mar 19, 2019 21:51

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Let's do a thought experiment. Let's say you and I agree t play Monopoly using real bills in place of Monopoly money. Now tell me how you'll play exactly the same as you would if we were playing with fake money.

# ¿ Mar 19, 2019 21:53

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Corbeau posted:

I would play exactly the same way, which is to say I would flip the table rather than having to play monopoly.

This is the right answer

# ¿ Mar 19, 2019 21:57

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Wait are you saying people could play for imaginary points?!?!?

# ¿ Mar 19, 2019 22:13

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Gambling addicts should just get one of those little computer blackjack or roulette handheld games, it's the same thing

# ¿ Mar 19, 2019 22:16

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Tom Clancy is Dead posted:

Why even play poker if your life isn't at stake? If the chips are just worth money, who cares?

If there is nothing of value on the line, there's no reason to not play almost every hand.

Doo doo doo just keep saying the same thing and ignore the points I made re: this

ChromiumCrush posted:

I know you are being sarcastic but, you're starting to get it.

I said it a while back, they are deliberately ignoring this

# ¿ Mar 19, 2019 22:22

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Somehow the guy above me gets it

Tom Clancy is Dead posted:

You have made no coherent points because you're unable to grasp that people can value winning or prestige or doing better than their friends, and can wager chips that represent fractional values of those.

Wait wait, are you saying people can play for NOTHING?

# ¿ Mar 19, 2019 22:32

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Ate My Balls Redux posted:

If you're not betting SOMETHING of value, you're not playing poker. People play completely differently when nothing is at stake because the wagering is a key factor. They play hands they shouldn't play, they stay in when they should cut "losses", etc.

This is a very good post that seems to have been lost in the shuffle because Tom Clancy keeps acting like it doesn't exist

# ¿ Mar 19, 2019 22:35

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Tom Clancy is Dead posted:

Edit: If you're trying to say that on average people play tighter when there are stakes, sure, that's true of any game. That isn't anything inherent to poker or it's wagering system. Most people play kitchen table Magic with genuinely dreadful decks. People playing Magic for monetary stakes, even without much success, are incredibly far towards the optimal by comparison.

You can also represent any decision making in anything as a wager.

Yes, you could represent any decision making in anything as a wager if you didn't know what words mean

# ¿ Mar 19, 2019 23:00

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

vegetables posted:

I mean, Poker is a pretty Spike-orientated game, isn’t it? You’re not exactly going to pull off a sick combo to win.

I can see how wagering would make a difference for me, at least, because it makes the individual hands in the game all matter, whereas otherwise I just start doing stupid things because I find it more fun than the actual game. I guess that’s the key for me; the incentive is needed so that my brain believes “playing well” is the most interesting thing it could be doing. I wish this wasn’t the case; my brain sucks

This is actually how most human brains work

# ¿ Mar 20, 2019 00:01

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Wait can you play for brownie points? Maybe you could obnoxiously explain it 16 more times as though it has any bearing on my point

# ¿ Mar 20, 2019 00:38

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

A big flaming stink posted:

It's more that the way poker is played is enormously dependent on people conveying information with how they value their wagers, and if the wagers are worth nothing then there is next to zero information being conveyed. Is the guy shoving because he still values winning and has a great hand, or is he shoving because he just wants to play a hand? Without any real information to be exchanged between players, it gets pretty boring fast.

I remember way back when PITR was still a subforum (RIP ) there was a contest between two posters on who would get to $100 dollars faster, a player starting from zero dollars and having no choice but to play freerolls to build his initial bankroll (freerolls are tournaments that cost literally nothing to play, and have tiny payouts for the winners) or a guy collecting cans and turning them in for change. Spoilers, both posters dropped out and disappeared. Poker without stakes is one of the most mind numbing things you can possibly do.

Okay but perhaps you didn't know that you could play for funsies

# ¿ Mar 20, 2019 01:51

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

DangerDongs posted:

EDH is fun, because it is multiplayer legacy where you can play your ponder and brainstorm along side of things that cost more than 3 mana.
I wish the vintage fast mana would be banned though.

EDH is the only format I even have paper decks for anymore. With the closure of my preferred LGS a few years back, I tapped out of any non-eternal format and only recently got back in on Arena

# ¿ Mar 20, 2019 10:11

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Mat Cauthon posted:

Nice Eternal re-skin.

If you're drafting GRN on Arena be prepared for lots and lots of mill and/or high alert decks, because I guess people are bored of the normal archetypes and want to mess around with gimmicky stuff. I played 3 of the former, 2 of the later, and 2 decks that were some ungodly combination of the two today. Most of them are very bad, but they drag the games out interminably.

High Alert is in Allegiance, not Guilds. Also High Alert is a pretty decent archetype in draft, especially if you can pull a Tower Defense

# ¿ Mar 22, 2019 21:21

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Madness is a real good mechanic, but it's probably annoying to design because they have to be conscious of the Madness cost, easy discard outlets in the sets surrounding it, and the balance between both casting costs and the p/t and abilities of the card in question

# ¿ Mar 26, 2019 10:11

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 5, 2024 00:29

Ate My Balls Redux: Aug 2, 2018; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Osmosisch posted:

Not gonna lie, some of Fallen Empires' flavour text about the falling societies (due to climate change, natch) was chilling to teenage me.

Fallen Empires had great world building, but terrible mechanics.

A set with the same theme today of a crumbling set of societies caused by tribes and colors of mana revolting against themselves and each other could be great

Also as someone whose first expansion was FE, the idea of a set of spells from long lost civilizations in my hand was pretty neat to 11 year old me

# ¿ Mar 27, 2019 19:53

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > Magic: the Gathering: Faithless Posting

«‹›7 »