For all those complaining about Hexproof vs Shroud, you can probably count on one hand the number of currently playable creatures in any format that carry either ability. I think it goes Thrun, Ascetic, Jwar Sphinx and...?
Argothian Enchantress
Blastoderm
Calcite Snapper
Crystalline Sliver
Empyrial Archangel
Giant Solifuge
Inkwell Leviathan
Kodama of the North Tree
Morphling
Nimble Mongoose
Simic Sky Swallower
Wall of Denial
edit-ok, missed the currently. still, inkwell and enchantress.
so they want to do it so theres not two mechanics that are similar...
yet there will still be two mechanics that are similar...
MAKES SENSE TO ME!
Your reading comprehension leaves something to be desired. Shroud will no longer be supported as a keyword on newly released cards for the time being. Cards with Shroud will retain Shroud. The end.
For all those complaining about Hexproof vs Shroud, you can probably count on one hand the number of currently playable creatures in any format that carry either ability. I think it goes Thrun, Ascetic, Jwar Sphinx and...?
Proportionately, much more cards showcasing Shroud are playable compared to, say, cards with Trample that are playable. Or Flying. Or First Strike. Or nearly any other keyworded ability. Shroud and Hexproof are also vastly different in utility and saying, "well, there's not much playable stuff in either ability," is a really weak argument, especially considering that "playable" is relative and one of the abilities was just introduced as a keyword as of last weekend.
How are they not that close? They both prevent spells and abilities from targeting something. The only difference is which players it protects from (all players or just opponents).
That's like saying, "How are Flying and Shadow not that close? They both prevent creatures without the ability from blocking. The only difference is which creatures can block creatures without the ability."
Which, if you get my gist, greatly undermines the functional difference.
I figured this would be happening soon after they announced that hexproof was being keyworded. It really is silly to continue to actively support two different keywords that are this similar in function, especially when one is strictly worse than the other. Shroud's preventing you from targeting your own stuff really is a source of awkward and frustrating game moments.
I know that some people like that shroud is a double-edged sword, that it's more complicated to use and work around than hexproof. Generally speaking, though, people don't like drawbacks on their own stuff. Especially when the ability seems like an advantage the majority of the time. Pleasing the smaller group of players who like that sort of gameplay at the expense of the larger number who are just frustrated doesn't make much sense.
Bad:
Land Destruction
Counters
Mana Burn
Damage Stacking
Life Loss
Drawbacks
X-for-1's
------>thinking (there we go...)
Good
Big Dumbs
Paying over 9000 mana for a spell thinking----->
I liked the duality of shroud, but I guess a coreset is a coreset after all...
And I know that I like to joke around, but honestly I hope that wizards saves some cards with drawbacks for expansion sets.
I'm all for letting the coreset be a jumping in point for the newer players (good thing), but I don't want the game to lose all of the strategy that was involved in knowing how and when to use your cards. Please wizards, there is good in having cards with drawbacks.
I figured this would be happening soon after they announced that hexproof was being keyworded. It really is silly to continue to actively support two different keywords that are this similar in function, especially when one is strictly worse than the other.
First of all, please see my argument in my previous post. Secondly, "strictly worse" is a generally contradictory phrase in Magic terminology; digitek provided a succinct description of how Shroud is not strictly worse than Hexproof.
Quote from luminum can »
Shroud's preventing you from targeting your own stuff really is a source of awkward and frustrating game moments.
If you don't know what your cards do, I suppose.
Quote from luminum can »
I know that some people like that shroud is a double-edged sword, that it's more complicated to use and work around than hexproof. Generally speaking, though, people don't like drawbacks on their own stuff.
Balance is not only appreciable, but also an integral aspect of games. Generally speaking.
Quote from luminum can »
Pleasing the smaller group of players who like that sort of gameplay at the expense of the larger number who are just frustrated doesn't make much sense.
Honestly, I don't know the last time I saw someone frustrated about piloting around her own Lightning Greaves; and anyone who fills a deck with Shrouded creatures and enchantments to buff them is just doing it wrong.
First of all, please see my argument in my previous post. Secondly, "strictly worse" is a generally contradictory phrase in Magic terminology; digitek provided a succinct description of how Shroud is not strictly worse than Hexproof.
If you don't know what your cards do, I suppose.
Balance is not only appreciable, but also an integral aspect of games. Generally speaking.
Honestly, I don't know the last time I saw someone frustrated about piloting around her own Lightning Greaves; and anyone who fills a deck with Shrouded creatures and enchantments to buff them is just doing it wrong.
The cases in which shroud is not worse than hexproof are so uncommon as to be easily ignored. A definition of "strictly better/worse" that literal is almost useless in discussion. Being more relaxed and including "better/worse in the vast majority of likely situations" is a much better use of the term, because it can actually mean something useful.
"If they don't like X, they're doing it wrong" isn't the best attitude to have towards the people who support one's product. Reacting to how people actually feel about or use something, rather than how you think they should be using it, is the right route. "If you can't figure this out/appreciate how it works, screw you" is a terrible business practice. Change your product to fit your consumers, don't force them to get used to what you're giving them.
Y'know, I kinda get that intimidate replaced fear, despite the fact that they work differently on artifacts and multicolored creatures. But shroud should have stayed in.
Think about it. Why is Lord of the Unreal better with hexproof? Think about all the cards that would be a little much without shroud, Blastoderm for example. What about flavor-wise, like Cloak and Dagger?
I guess a lot of cards in the future it wont make too much of a difference. It just seems like such a waste.
EDIT: Also, not too relevant, but think of this scenario: All your creatures have shroud. You have a hand full of removal. Someone uses Mindslaver or Sorin Markov's ultimate (both of which are in standard). You are safe, but if they had hexproof... I know unllikely but funny to type.
Balance is not only appreciable, but also an integral aspect of games. Generally speaking.
Honestly, I don't know the last time I saw someone frustrated about piloting around her own Lightning Greaves; and anyone who fills a deck with Shrouded creatures and enchantments to buff them is just doing it wrong.
I agree the game needs shroud and hexproof long term, but I see nothing wrong with leaving shroud in the dust for a while and giving hexproof a healthy run. They don't really need to get mixed together in sets, they could, but it's better design I think to let one or the other out into the world at a time.
Maybe you never have issues with greaves, but lots of newer players do and it simply isn't intuitive. "So he puts on boots that keep him from picking up a sword, but he can pick up the sword then put on the boots????" is my general line of thought when contemplating them despite having played since 6th edition.
I think we've seen a ton of shroud variants and I think some years of new hexproof variants will be a nice change. I don't think the hole left by shroud will be inadequately filled by hexproof, just differently filled.
For all but a few cases Hexproof is better than Shroud, but there are situations like Abyss and Magus of the Abyss when it is not. If they continue to ramp up on Hexproof and not shroud, I wouldn't be surprised to see an increase in casual play of cards that force the controller to target.
I believe even in those situations, The Abyss and Magus Of The Abyss have been ruled as an ability controlled by your opponent (if your not the owner or controller of those permanents).
Poisonous has been replaced, Wither and shroud had something better replace them, Lifelink and deathtouch have seen drastic rules changes.
what next?
Wither wasn't replaced by anything. Infect isn't an "upgrade" of wither, since infect is a downgrade for a deck that seeks to win through normal damage and not poison counters. And we've been assured that each mechanic has its place, and wither will be seen again in the future when it's appropriate.
I believe even in those situations, The Abyss and Magus Of The Abyss have been ruled as an ability controlled by your opponent (if your not the owner or controller of those permanents).
They mean on your own creatures. So if, say, everything you control has shroud somehow, you can't get hurt by your own Abyss/Magus.
Your reading comprehension leaves something to be desired. Shroud will no longer be supported as a keyword on newly released cards for the time being. Cards with Shroud will retain Shroud. The end..
Attempting to insult me (and failing) dosent make you "right"
My point is valid.
If they are no longer printing cards with SHROUD and rather HEXPROOF (i understand)
and previous cards with SHROUD will remain unchanged (i get it)
I am entirely in favor of shroud and hexproof not being in the same set or block at the same time, in the same manner I am in favor of +1/+1 counters and -1/-1 counters not being in the same set at the same time. Even if it's pretty simple to keep track of, it causes too much confusion when there is a lot going on on the board. Switching things up can be interesting and fun, so good move wizards!
That said, I will be very angry if shroud has been obsoleted by hexproof, the way fear has been obsoleted by intimidate. Hopefully shroud will come back into it's own again one day.
The cases in which shroud is not worse than hexproof are so uncommon as to be easily ignored. A definition of "strictly better/worse" that literal is almost useless in discussion. Being more relaxed and including "better/worse in the vast majority of likely situations" is a much better use of the term, because it can actually mean something useful.
Fair enough.
Quote from luminum can »
"If they don't like X, they're doing it wrong" isn't the best attitude to have towards the people who support one's product. Reacting to how people actually feel about or use something, rather than how you think they should be using it, is the right route. "If you can't figure this out/appreciate how it works, screw you" is a terrible business practice. Change your product to fit your consumers, don't force them to get used to what you're giving them.
More like, "if they can't figure out how X interacts with the rest of the rules of the game, they're doing it wrong," and, "if you can't figure this out/appreciate how it works, maybe you ought to find a less intelligent hobby." It's not as if the advantages and drawbacks of Shroud are in a constant state of flux; once you figure out how to have two or more creatures out so you can manipulate a pair of Greaves freely, you shouldn't need to do it again; once you make the mistake of trying to enchant a Shrouded creature once or twice, you shouldn't do it again. Quite frankly, if a given individual struggles with this kind of concept, I really have to wonder that Magic might be too intricate a game for him or her. Like I said, abilities with pros and cons inspire strategic planning and rational discourse.
I recognize that as a business, Wizards of the Coast is ultimately out for a profit, but I hope you can forgive me for critizing the idea that Magic is devolving from a trading card game of relative The Matrix caliber to that of Transformers in the name of cash flow. It's the same reason that Aesop Rock doesn't have as large of an exposure as Key$ha: an appeal to simplicity.
I'm actually very surprised by this. I always thought that shroud/hexproof would be kind of like first/double strike. One is usually better than the other, but both are useful.
Sphinx of Jwar Isle saw a good amount of play costing 6. Do you think that it would have seen any if it cost 7 and had hexproof? I don't think so, and that's why I'm not incredibly happy with this announcement.
I really am going to miss getting new players on things like this...
"Consume strength..."
"Your guy has shroud."
"Go to equip..."
"Shroud"
"Daybreak Coronet?"
"Still no..."
You can still get them on hexproof (hell, I had to remind one new player 3 times in the same game that my my Aven Fleetwing couldn't be targetted by his spells.)
More like, "if they can't figure out how X interacts with the rest of the rules of the game, they're doing it wrong," and, "if you can't figure this out/appreciate how it works, maybe you ought to find a less intelligent hobby." It's not as if the advantages and drawbacks of Shroud are in a constant state of flux; once you figure out how to have two or more creatures out so you can manipulate a pair of Greaves freely, you shouldn't need to do it again; once you make the mistake of trying to enchant a Shrouded creature once or twice, you shouldn't do it again. Quite frankly, if a given individual struggles with this kind of concept, I really have to wonder that Magic might be too intricate a game for him or her. Like I said, abilities with pros and cons inspire strategic planning and rational discourse.
I recognize that as a business, Wizards of the Coast is ultimately out for a profit, but I hope you can forgive me for critizing the idea that Magic is devolving from a trading card game of relative The Matrix caliber to that of Transformers in the name of cash flow. It's the same reason that Aesop Rock doesn't have as large of an exposure as Key$ha: an appeal to simplicity.
Magic is rich in complexity even in its "simpler" incarnations. This is really a minuscule loss compared to what the game as a whole has to offer. It's not "devolving" into anything. Removing complexity in some parts of the game allows it to make use of it in other areas while retaining more of its accessibility overall.
Magic is rich in complexity even in its "simpler" incarnations. This is really a minuscule loss compared to what the game as a whole has to offer. It's not "devolving" into anything. Removing complexity in some parts of the game allows it to make use of it in other areas while retaining more of its accessibility overall.
You're right. I should clarify that I feel this is one instance in which Magic took a hit. Also, what do you think about my analogy concerning Flying and Shadow?
I agree the game needs shroud and hexproof long term, but I see nothing wrong with leaving shroud in the dust for a while and giving hexproof a healthy run. They don't really need to get mixed together in sets, they could, but it's better design I think to let one or the other out into the world at a time.
I agree, but I also realize that WotC has a habit of dishing out white lies simply to appeal to the disgruntled, such as, "maybe it will be back later sometime," or, "we take banning cards very seriously and don't do it unless we have to," when they really mean, "we don't know that it's ever coming back," and "oh hey, we're banning these."
I'm not saying Shroud will never be back, just that it's silly to equate it with Hexproof and pretend like there isn't a fundamental difference in functionality. Despite this, Hexproof will replace Shroud (meaning we won't see Shroud until an unforeseeable time in the future), when there could just as easily be a compromise such as showcasing Hexproof in Innistrad and Shroud in the next block, or assigning Shroud to green and Hexproof to blue, as some other posters have suggested.
Hence my question, what will happen to stuff like Whispersilk cloak
will it still be around, will it get a functional reprint with hexproof?
god...
Don't get so touchy; your posts want for syntax and I don't feel bad at all for missing your intended meaning. You said, " buy buy [sic] all the good stuff with shroud", which, given your questions which preceded that statement, I took to mean you figured cards with Shroud were being updated to have Hexproof.
I think flying, intimidate, and shadow should all get axed and be replaced with "this creature is unblockable". Seriously, how many times have you tried to attack with a creature with intimidate only to be blocked by a dumb artifact creature? That's not fun. Understanding keywords is not fun. Let's make the game more fun by throwing out keywords that are worse than other abilities, so that evasion will just be evasion, protection will just be from nasty spells, and no one will have to feel bad when they're told how their cards work.
I just had a thought. Why not keyword the other half of shroud too? Shroud leads to undercosted fatties, would they be even better if only their controller couldn't target them?
buffproof?
I think flying, intimidate, and shadow should all get axed and be replaced with "this creature is unblockable". Seriously, how many times have you tried to attack with a creature with intimidate only to be blocked by a dumb artifact creature? That's not fun. Understanding keywords is not fun. Let's make the game more fun by throwing out keywords that are worse than other abilities, so that evasion will just be evasion, protection will just be from nasty spells, and no one will have to feel bad when they're told how their cards work.
I wish I could quote this in my signature, but it's too long. It's brilliantly succinct and I laughed hard in any case.
"Consume strength..."
"Your guy has shroud."
"Go to equip..."
"Shroud"
"Daybreak Coronet?"
"Still no..."
Argothian Enchantress
Blastoderm
Calcite Snapper
Crystalline Sliver
Empyrial Archangel
Giant Solifuge
Inkwell Leviathan
Kodama of the North Tree
Morphling
Nimble Mongoose
Simic Sky Swallower
Wall of Denial
edit-ok, missed the currently. still, inkwell and enchantress.
Your reading comprehension leaves something to be desired. Shroud will no longer be supported as a keyword on newly released cards for the time being. Cards with Shroud will retain Shroud. The end.
Argothian Enchantress - Enchantress
Cephalid Inkshrouder - Dredge
Drove of Elves - Elfball
Inkwell Leviathan - Reanimator
Nimble Mongoose - one of those legacy decks...
Scion of Oona - Faeries
Sylvan Safekeeper - Elfball
How about noncreatures?
Lightning Greaves - Commander
Solitary Confinement - Enchantress
Sterling Grove - Enchantress/Commander
Swiftfoot Boots - Commander
Proportionately, much more cards showcasing Shroud are playable compared to, say, cards with Trample that are playable. Or Flying. Or First Strike. Or nearly any other keyworded ability. Shroud and Hexproof are also vastly different in utility and saying, "well, there's not much playable stuff in either ability," is a really weak argument, especially considering that "playable" is relative and one of the abilities was just introduced as a keyword as of last weekend.
That's like saying, "How are Flying and Shadow not that close? They both prevent creatures without the ability from blocking. The only difference is which creatures can block creatures without the ability."
Which, if you get my gist, greatly undermines the functional difference.
I know that some people like that shroud is a double-edged sword, that it's more complicated to use and work around than hexproof. Generally speaking, though, people don't like drawbacks on their own stuff. Especially when the ability seems like an advantage the majority of the time. Pleasing the smaller group of players who like that sort of gameplay at the expense of the larger number who are just frustrated doesn't make much sense.
R Citizen Cane (Feldon of the Third Path)
Bad:
Land Destruction
Counters
Mana Burn
Damage Stacking
Life Loss
Drawbacks
X-for-1's
------>thinking (there we go...)
Good
Big Dumbs
Paying over 9000 mana for a spell
thinking----->I liked the duality of shroud, but I guess a coreset is a coreset after all...
And I know that I like to joke around, but honestly I hope that wizards saves some cards with drawbacks for expansion sets.
I'm all for letting the coreset be a jumping in point for the newer players (good thing), but I don't want the game to lose all of the strategy that was involved in knowing how and when to use your cards. Please wizards, there is good in having cards with drawbacks.
Thanks to Rivenor @ //forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=329663"/"> Miraculous Recovery for the Sig!
First of all, please see my argument in my previous post. Secondly, "strictly worse" is a generally contradictory phrase in Magic terminology; digitek provided a succinct description of how Shroud is not strictly worse than Hexproof.
If you don't know what your cards do, I suppose.
Balance is not only appreciable, but also an integral aspect of games. Generally speaking.
Honestly, I don't know the last time I saw someone frustrated about piloting around her own Lightning Greaves; and anyone who fills a deck with Shrouded creatures and enchantments to buff them is just doing it wrong.
The cases in which shroud is not worse than hexproof are so uncommon as to be easily ignored. A definition of "strictly better/worse" that literal is almost useless in discussion. Being more relaxed and including "better/worse in the vast majority of likely situations" is a much better use of the term, because it can actually mean something useful.
"If they don't like X, they're doing it wrong" isn't the best attitude to have towards the people who support one's product. Reacting to how people actually feel about or use something, rather than how you think they should be using it, is the right route. "If you can't figure this out/appreciate how it works, screw you" is a terrible business practice. Change your product to fit your consumers, don't force them to get used to what you're giving them.
R Citizen Cane (Feldon of the Third Path)
Think about it. Why is Lord of the Unreal better with hexproof? Think about all the cards that would be a little much without shroud, Blastoderm for example. What about flavor-wise, like Cloak and Dagger?
I guess a lot of cards in the future it wont make too much of a difference. It just seems like such a waste.
EDIT: Also, not too relevant, but think of this scenario: All your creatures have shroud. You have a hand full of removal. Someone uses Mindslaver or Sorin Markov's ultimate (both of which are in standard). You are safe, but if they had hexproof... I know unllikely but funny to type.
WUControlWU
Commander (EDH)
WBRKaalia of the VastWBR
WRGMayael the AnimaWRG
I agree the game needs shroud and hexproof long term, but I see nothing wrong with leaving shroud in the dust for a while and giving hexproof a healthy run. They don't really need to get mixed together in sets, they could, but it's better design I think to let one or the other out into the world at a time.
Maybe you never have issues with greaves, but lots of newer players do and it simply isn't intuitive. "So he puts on boots that keep him from picking up a sword, but he can pick up the sword then put on the boots????" is my general line of thought when contemplating them despite having played since 6th edition.
I think we've seen a ton of shroud variants and I think some years of new hexproof variants will be a nice change. I don't think the hole left by shroud will be inadequately filled by hexproof, just differently filled.
Poisonous has been replaced, Wither and shroud had something better replace them, Lifelink and deathtouch have seen drastic rules changes.
what next?
On Modern Masters 2:
Will be kept until 12/31/2013 to prove if Right or Wrong.Proven right 1/27/2013I believe even in those situations, The Abyss and Magus Of The Abyss have been ruled as an ability controlled by your opponent (if your not the owner or controller of those permanents).
Wither wasn't replaced by anything. Infect isn't an "upgrade" of wither, since infect is a downgrade for a deck that seeks to win through normal damage and not poison counters. And we've been assured that each mechanic has its place, and wither will be seen again in the future when it's appropriate.
R Citizen Cane (Feldon of the Third Path)
They mean on your own creatures. So if, say, everything you control has shroud somehow, you can't get hurt by your own Abyss/Magus.
Commander:
R Daretti, Scrap Savant
BR Olivia Voldaren
BRG Shattergang Brothers
GUR Riku of Two Reflections
WBG Karador, Ghost Chieftain
Attempting to insult me (and failing) dosent make you "right"
My point is valid.
If they are no longer printing cards with SHROUD and rather HEXPROOF (i understand)
and previous cards with SHROUD will remain unchanged (i get it)
In what place does it make sense to reprint Lightning Greaves when Swiftfoot Boots is around.
The same can be said WITH EVERY OTHER CARD WITH SHROUD.
Hence my question, what will happen to stuff like Whispersilk cloak
will it still be around, will it get a functional reprint with hexproof?
god...
That said, I will be very angry if shroud has been obsoleted by hexproof, the way fear has been obsoleted by intimidate. Hopefully shroud will come back into it's own again one day.
WUR Geist Midrange WUR
Commander
W Nahiri's Celestial Foundry W
WB Orzhov Inquisition (Cleric Tribal) WB
WUBRG Progenitus's Prismatic Domain WUBRG
WURG Kynaios and Tiro of Meletis Love You WURG
WUG Rafiq of the Many Auracrafting WUG
WRG Hazezon Tamar Overrun WRG
G Seton's Druid Ramp G
Gathering Magic
Goblin Artisans
Channel Fireball
Daily MTG Making Magic
Daily MTG Latest Developments
MTG Color Pie
Fair enough.
More like, "if they can't figure out how X interacts with the rest of the rules of the game, they're doing it wrong," and, "if you can't figure this out/appreciate how it works, maybe you ought to find a less intelligent hobby." It's not as if the advantages and drawbacks of Shroud are in a constant state of flux; once you figure out how to have two or more creatures out so you can manipulate a pair of Greaves freely, you shouldn't need to do it again; once you make the mistake of trying to enchant a Shrouded creature once or twice, you shouldn't do it again. Quite frankly, if a given individual struggles with this kind of concept, I really have to wonder that Magic might be too intricate a game for him or her. Like I said, abilities with pros and cons inspire strategic planning and rational discourse.
I recognize that as a business, Wizards of the Coast is ultimately out for a profit, but I hope you can forgive me for critizing the idea that Magic is devolving from a trading card game of relative The Matrix caliber to that of Transformers in the name of cash flow. It's the same reason that Aesop Rock doesn't have as large of an exposure as Key$ha: an appeal to simplicity.
Sphinx of Jwar Isle saw a good amount of play costing 6. Do you think that it would have seen any if it cost 7 and had hexproof? I don't think so, and that's why I'm not incredibly happy with this announcement.
You can still get them on hexproof (hell, I had to remind one new player 3 times in the same game that my my Aven Fleetwing couldn't be targetted by his spells.)
Magic is rich in complexity even in its "simpler" incarnations. This is really a minuscule loss compared to what the game as a whole has to offer. It's not "devolving" into anything. Removing complexity in some parts of the game allows it to make use of it in other areas while retaining more of its accessibility overall.
R Citizen Cane (Feldon of the Third Path)
You're right. I should clarify that I feel this is one instance in which Magic took a hit. Also, what do you think about my analogy concerning Flying and Shadow?
I agree, but I also realize that WotC has a habit of dishing out white lies simply to appeal to the disgruntled, such as, "maybe it will be back later sometime," or, "we take banning cards very seriously and don't do it unless we have to," when they really mean, "we don't know that it's ever coming back," and "oh hey, we're banning these."
I'm not saying Shroud will never be back, just that it's silly to equate it with Hexproof and pretend like there isn't a fundamental difference in functionality. Despite this, Hexproof will replace Shroud (meaning we won't see Shroud until an unforeseeable time in the future), when there could just as easily be a compromise such as showcasing Hexproof in Innistrad and Shroud in the next block, or assigning Shroud to green and Hexproof to blue, as some other posters have suggested.
Don't get so touchy; your posts want for syntax and I don't feel bad at all for missing your intended meaning. You said, " buy buy [sic] all the good stuff with shroud", which, given your questions which preceded that statement, I took to mean you figured cards with Shroud were being updated to have Hexproof.
buffproof?
I wish I could quote this in my signature, but it's too long. It's brilliantly succinct and I laughed hard in any case.