This thread is for the discussion of my latest article, MTGS Classics - The Quest for Magic. We would be grateful if you would let us know what you think, but please keep your comments on topic.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
--
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
This isn't even funny anymore. Four times? The same article, four times? bateleur even made it clear it had been printed too many times. Surely, we have printed enough articles where this does not need to be printed four times? What gives?
This isn't even funny anymore. Four times? The same article, four times? bateleur even made it clear it had been printed too many times. Surely, we have printed enough articles where this does not need to be printed four times? What gives?
--
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
4 times in the last year? Wow, that is a lot. I remember... Yea, I don't think I read this when it first came out, and I have read it before.
Still, I remember chatting up my buddies ears when I read it because I felt it echoed so true. Keep up the good, err, reruns bat. And I don't mean run this again for a bit X_x
I really liked this article, but I must say, I`ve read this before. Don`t get me wrong, it is an awesome article and has opened my eyes to my own "quest", but can someone please try to keep track of these things... That said I really appreciated this article as it gave me a wake up call, as it were, to what I was or wasn`t doing with my magic playing. It gave me a chance to look a little deeper and a little less serious at the game as a whole. I didn`t write this when i first read this awhile back and i really don`t think my choice of words would have accomplished much . But I can tell you now that my magic has gotten alot more fun. And lot less COMPLICATED. Thanks for writing a great article and thanks for giving me a new perspective on a great game.
CWS
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"These aren`t the Droids your looking for......Move along."
I really liked this article, but I must say, I`ve read this before. Don`t get me wrong, it is an awesome article and has opened my eyes to my own "quest", but can someone please try to keep track of these things...
Yes, we're reworking how we choose the Classics so that this won't be a problem in the future. A bit of an inside view: When we're reviewing all of the articles ever posted, the titles are cut off after a certain (very short) point making it almost impossible to figure out what's been posted as a Classic.
Rest assured that Classics will be more varied; we apologize that this one's come up yet again (here, Dom, have a pillow for that desk), though yeah, it's good.
Please keep this thread from here on to discussion of the article, not to the fact that the article has been printed five times.
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO "I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
Excellent Article. Very Insightful. This was well timed for me as I have recently been questioning why I play magic (caused by money problems :mad:). I have my answer now though :D.
Anyone ever think this article was published 4/5 times because it's a good article that players should read so then they can re-evaluate why they play the game? I think so. My 2 cents.
Excellent Article. Very Insightful. This was well timed for me as I have recently been questioning why I play magic (caused by money problems :mad:). I have my answer now though :D.
Anyone ever think this article was published 4/5 times because it's a good article that players should read so then they can re-evaluate why they play the game? I think so. My 2 cents.
It's an absolutely fantastic article, and deserves to be republished - just not four times a year.
I'm glad that it did come at just the right time for you, though.
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO "I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
When I wrote my comments on the above stated article, in no way were my words intended as anything but positive(althoughthe tone says otherwise)....I was in the middle of preparing for Thanksgiving and was a little rushed for words. Please accept my apologies if I seemed a little miffed about the # of times I have seen this article. I think this is one of the better classics and every time I read it it gives me a different perspective on what my gameplay needs and what it doesnt need. This article is basically telling magic players its alright to play AND have fun at the same time. Alot of times a players will and determination to go undefeated or to make their deck that much more deadly sometimes gives away the fundamental application of this game....TO HAVE FUN!!!! Recently I had forgotten that in my "quest" to be a better player. For instance; last week at FNM I was going up for top 8. Killer game where I piloted a Solar Fire against a B/W discard. It was in the rubber match and all my firemanes were removed from the game via seek or castigate. Along comes a cheerleader for the other guy and I didnt quite appreciate his appearence and dutifull calling of certain effects of certain cards. Instead of asking him politely to please refrain from any of that i quite literally made the guy leave quickly via a few quick sarcastic jabs aimed at the dome. Later I met up with the guy and appologized for my actions. Lesson: In your quest for dominance it is never okay to browbeat someone for observing and commenting. As long as the comments are good natured and dont lead to official problems. I didnt see that. All I saw was someone my opponent plays with and wanted to bury him like I wanted to bury my opponent. It didnt happen the way I wanted it to and I lost right at the last minute due to a skeletal vampire/ worship thing, effectively blocking my lighning helix for the win. Needless to say I was dissapointed and was quite ready to trash my deck. Not a good thing to do as it is a really expensiv peice of work and I really like playing it. Never let your emotions get in the way. I lost sight of that and Thanks again for reminding me how much this game means to me and others alike.
CWS
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"These aren`t the Droids your looking for......Move along."
i feel the need to point out a 'factual' error in the article. Lancelot was not the knight that sought the Holy Grail: it was in fact his son, Galahad, most pure and valourous of the knights that acheived that quest. Lancelot's fame is through his prowess of arms (though he would be outdone by his bastard son) and his prowess of bed, vis a vis his affairs with both Guinevere and Elaine (Bearer of the Grail).
Otherwise, great article... just thought you should know that lancelot had very little to do with the grail.
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO "I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
That's probably because it's more about asking a question than providing the answer. In particular, the answer will vary from player to player.
If you're having fun with the game at any given point that's great. But if you're not - and many players experience this at some point - it's worth asking yourself what it is you're looking for from the game, what you expect from it and whether you should still be playing.
For example when Coldsnap came out I really didn't like the set. So I just stopped playing anything except Casual from then until the online release of Time Spiral.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
--
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
i feel the need to point out a 'factual' error in the article. Lancelot was not the knight that sought the Holy Grail: it was in fact his son, Galahad, most pure and valourous of the knights that acheived that quest. Lancelot's fame is through his prowess of arms (though he would be outdone by his bastard son) and his prowess of bed, vis a vis his affairs with both Guinevere and Elaine (Bearer of the Grail).
Otherwise, great article... just thought you should know that lancelot had very little to do with the grail.
Lancelot did seek it (lots of knights did). In fact, he saw it, but he wasn't pure enough to get it.
so that makes the moral of the story "you can have goals when you play, but you'll never get them because you aren't of pure enough spirit"?
The galahad story makes more sense "Even coming from humble beginnings, you can acheive greatness in all things you do."
Quote from Article »
But the real question is: how was Galahad able to succeed where Lancelot had failed?
...
At length he received a revelation of sorts. The grail was indeed the cup of Christ, but despite all the historical and religious importance it had taken on and despite the quest and the many knights who had sought it... the grail was still just a simple cup. Galahad came to understand that it was not the quest for the grail that mattered, it was the quest for something. The grail had, for the knights of the round table, become a symbol of that ideal."
...
Richard Garfield is a skilled game designer, but he did not design Magic to be the grail. He designed it to be nothing more than a passtime to fill the idle minutes between gaming sessions. It was only when a hundred knights set out on their quest that Magic became the grail. The game's faults only exist in this context. As Richard designed it, the game achieves what it set out to achieve. When Christ drank from the holy grail, to him it was just a cup."
The fact that is is said very well hides the fact that very little is said with this article. Are we sublimating our desires into an idolic vision of gaming ecstacy? Not any more than one normally sublimates, and I can give good reasons why I say so.
1- The fact that many people saw the same greater possibilities in Magic points to it being a real possibility and not just a fictional sublimation. Magic was suited to being more than just a cooldown game between RPG sessions.
2- That nascent suitability was developed as the game underwent the appropriate changes. The glimpsed insights of the players informed the changes the designers made to the game.
It should be noted that the writer conflates the personal experience of perfect play with the question of Magic's status as a great game. The two are not unrelated, but they're more distinct than the article asserts they are. Magic is a new kind of great game: one that incorporates an element of randomness.
Magic was suited to being more than just a cooldown game between RPG sessions.
Yep, I'd agree with that. But the problem is that most of the potential to be something more lay in the TCG mechanic. Magic itself, as a game, couldn't (and can't) take the strain.
That nascent suitability was developed as the game underwent the appropriate changes.
Things like the stack do indeed help an awful lot.
But really I don't think the question of what TCGs (and similar games not based around cards) might be capable of has been answered yet.
Magic is a new kind of great game: one that incorporates an element of randomness.
Games being entertainment, there will always be varying tastes.
For me personally it's not randomness which hurts Magic the most. Consider these cards:
Cancel
Wrath of God
Stone Rain
Opportunity
Between them (and innumerable variants) they place a cage around Magic, defining what is possible. The exact details of why are easily enough material for an entire article, though. I'll write it sometime, then we can have the argument in the comments thread.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
--
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
I don't think randomness hurts Magic at all. It can hurt your chances in a particluar game, but the Magic itself benefits from the random factor.
I'm completely lost on what you mean by those four example cards placing "a cage around Magic, defining what is possible." I can't imagine that you would make the argument that such mechanics shouldn't exist. And if thgey exist, they must have a particular cost, whatever that may end up being.
I'm completely lost on what you mean by those four example cards placing "a cage around Magic, defining what is possible." I can't imagine that you would make the argument that such mechanics shouldn't exist. And if thgey exist, they must have a particular cost, whatever that may end up being.
He's saying that those cards as they exist (i.e. *** at 2WW with no regen) limit the playable possibilities. It's analogous to how the large presence of good removal spells in current T2 limits the number of creatures that can be used effectively (except bateleur is talking more about designing, I think).
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
I was going to say that.
head -> desk
etc.
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
Still, I remember chatting up my buddies ears when I read it because I felt it echoed so true. Keep up the good, err, reruns bat. And I don't mean run this again for a bit X_x
Extendo
CWS
Yes, we're reworking how we choose the Classics so that this won't be a problem in the future. A bit of an inside view: When we're reviewing all of the articles ever posted, the titles are cut off after a certain (very short) point making it almost impossible to figure out what's been posted as a Classic.
Rest assured that Classics will be more varied; we apologize that this one's come up yet again (here, Dom, have a pillow for that desk), though yeah, it's good.
Please keep this thread from here on to discussion of the article, not to the fact that the article has been printed five times.
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO
"I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
Anyone ever think this article was published 4/5 times because it's a good article that players should read so then they can re-evaluate why they play the game? I think so. My 2 cents.
Eff the Island. Ban the Swamp
good job ^^
It's an absolutely fantastic article, and deserves to be republished - just not four times a year.
I'm glad that it did come at just the right time for you, though.
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO
"I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
Life's a journey not a destination... ok, I've heard that one before, all nice and good... but this translates to magic how?
Magic = quest.
?
So magic is about playing a game and the people you play with, not the game itself? That's about the best I can get out of it.
CWS
Otherwise, great article... just thought you should know that lancelot had very little to do with the grail.
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO
"I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
That's probably because it's more about asking a question than providing the answer. In particular, the answer will vary from player to player.
If you're having fun with the game at any given point that's great. But if you're not - and many players experience this at some point - it's worth asking yourself what it is you're looking for from the game, what you expect from it and whether you should still be playing.
For example when Coldsnap came out I really didn't like the set. So I just stopped playing anything except Casual from then until the online release of Time Spiral.
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
Lancelot did seek it (lots of knights did). In fact, he saw it, but he wasn't pure enough to get it.
The galahad story makes more sense "Even coming from humble beginnings, you can acheive greatness in all things you do."
and still enlightening, as perspectives change from day to day and articles like this are like reminder text for why we do the things we do.
Reality is but a perception of your being --
Visit my blog!!! - http://huffalump-magic.blogspot.com/
"The brain is wider than the sky,
For, put them side by side,
The one the other will include
With ease, and you beside."
—Emily Dickinson
For sales or trade, visit my blog or visit my ebay blog for my listings :http://myworld.ebay.com/arcane7828
881
Oooh Dicey:
[dice=1]100[/dice]
I'm not sure what you're trying to contest.
1- The fact that many people saw the same greater possibilities in Magic points to it being a real possibility and not just a fictional sublimation. Magic was suited to being more than just a cooldown game between RPG sessions.
2- That nascent suitability was developed as the game underwent the appropriate changes. The glimpsed insights of the players informed the changes the designers made to the game.
It should be noted that the writer conflates the personal experience of perfect play with the question of Magic's status as a great game. The two are not unrelated, but they're more distinct than the article asserts they are. Magic is a new kind of great game: one that incorporates an element of randomness.
Yep, I'd agree with that. But the problem is that most of the potential to be something more lay in the TCG mechanic. Magic itself, as a game, couldn't (and can't) take the strain.
Things like the stack do indeed help an awful lot.
But really I don't think the question of what TCGs (and similar games not based around cards) might be capable of has been answered yet.
Games being entertainment, there will always be varying tastes.
For me personally it's not randomness which hurts Magic the most. Consider these cards:
Cancel
Wrath of God
Stone Rain
Opportunity
Between them (and innumerable variants) they place a cage around Magic, defining what is possible. The exact details of why are easily enough material for an entire article, though. I'll write it sometime, then we can have the argument in the comments thread.
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
I'm completely lost on what you mean by those four example cards placing "a cage around Magic, defining what is possible." I can't imagine that you would make the argument that such mechanics shouldn't exist. And if thgey exist, they must have a particular cost, whatever that may end up being.
He's saying that those cards as they exist (i.e. *** at 2WW with no regen) limit the playable possibilities. It's analogous to how the large presence of good removal spells in current T2 limits the number of creatures that can be used effectively (except bateleur is talking more about designing, I think).