MTG Salvation

Quote from Decadent_Creed

Waste Not? More like, "Play Not," amirite guys? But seriously it's not amazing. It would require a pretty slow, controlly standard to see play commonly.

Thanks for making another bad card, playerbase.

did we? or were we forced into it?

we had to revote multiple times, and the options we were given to vote on were very limited.

Lore Broker.
Wistful Thinking.
Warped Devotion.

HAHAHAHA

Quote from Reaver027

Yeah. First Land won and Wizard decided they did not want to make land and let us revote.
Then they give us 8 possible cards and axe the best card of those due to a stupid rule that i gues noone understood why it was there in the first place.
After that we had one barely playable card and it lost. Well thats on us.

I think plenty of people understood the "no submissions outside the US" rule. It's unfortunate the submitter did not.

Quote from Serpos of Urug

I think plenty of people understood the "no submissions outside the US" rule. It's unfortunate the submitter did not.

it's also unfortunate that it was better than all the American submissions.

Quote from Lord of Atlantis

it's also unfortunate that it was better than all the American submissions.

And that there was such a rule to begin with. Why should their non-US customers/fan-base not be presented at all?

Quote from Tzefick

And that there was such a rule to begin with. Why should their non-US customers/fan-base not be presented at all?

Because foreign IP laws don't conform the US ones. It would be cost-prohibitive to employ a staff that knows the ins and outs of every country's courts in case they decide to sue WotC for the profits from the sale of every Waste Not.

If you don't like it, the choices are either 1. Get to work on a treaty with the US to make your laws conform for the purposes of open trade, or 2. Invent your own card game and market it worldwide and then leave the US customers out in the cold.

Quote from SirBruce

Because foreign IP laws don't conform the US ones. It would be cost-prohibitive to employ a staff that knows the ins and outs of every country's courts in case they decide to sue WotC for the profits from the sale of every Waste Not.

If you don't like it, the choices are either 1. Get to work on a treaty with the US to make your laws conform for the purposes of open trade, or 2. Invent your own card game and market it worldwide and then leave the US customers out in the cold.

Well ain't you just a slice of sunshine...

I believe WotC could have created a terms and condition agreement to disable any claims you could possibly have considering the use of your contribution.

Also why should one country try to make a treaty with the just one other country instead of making a global treaty? To close a possibly up-start on a political debate that I don't care to continue I'd end with: please get a sense of humor and a broader view than your own nosetip.

You can't bind a person in another country to a legal agreement in yours, since the laws you're using to bind them don't exist where they live. No such agreement would work.

Further, a collective global set of laws for IP is less of a good idea than you think it is, for a number of complicated reasons.

A global treaty would be great, but even regional treaties like the currently being negotiated Trans Pacific Partnership are getting a lot of pushback from Internet pirate types who don't like any sort of copyright.

Quote from Leyasu

There is a difference between corporation and copyright. Most of the pushback comes from the forcing of archaic and unwelcome copyright law onto those who don't have it, as well as the extension of goverment bodies outside of their soverign jurisdiction.

The TPP is about a lot of things, but the copyright part is about copyright, not corporate. So that is just cheap demagougery. The fact you consider it "archaic and unwelcome copyright law" is exactly my point; it's getting pushback from people who don't support copyright. And finally, there is no issue with sovereign jurisdiction here; the treaty still has to be approved by their respective governments, so no one is losing their sovereign anything.

Quote from Leyasu

Also, Wizards ''could'' of accepted submissions from the playerbase, as long as they had included a clause under the international trading standards that the submission is entered into a non-prize, non-profit competition. As in, the submissions creator recieves credit and recognition for their work, but relinquishes rights to claim money from it.

YANAL, so please don't make such pronouncements as gospel.

Quote from Leyasu

I would be one of those people that defies corpocracy for open expressionism, however, that means I have no right to demand protectionism (copyright to my material).

I see I correctly tagged you in advance as someone who opposes copyrights.

Quote from Leyasu

In the end, WOTC is bound by Hasbro's legal stance. As long as Hasbro is a strong supporter of copyright enforcement and protectionism, and solemn use policies, then Hasrbo won't do anything that doesn't grant them 100% dictat of how their brands/products/things are used commercially. The only exception seems to be artists, who often sell their works with a ''right to use'' licence, thus preventing Hasbro from suing the artist for selling prints or remakes of their own work.

They aren't "bound by it", as it's no different from WotC's pre-Hasbro legal stance. It's the same legal stance taken by 99% of all successful businesses.

Let's not continue this discussion further, as it's off-topic.

Quote from Leyasu

Or, you know, creative-commons. Which WOTC is really not a friend of, and is the enemy (and main pushback) against Trans-Pacific and other Global trade agreements. Many people don't believe that having a strict defination of ''art, music and literature'' that ignores regional, cultural or religious differences is unacceptable. I would be one of those people that defies corpocracy for open expressionism, however, that means I have no right to demand protectionism (copyright to my material).

You really feel that artists and designers do not have the right to protect the use and sale of their work world wide?

Quote from Leyasu

I believe it should be for the individual to decide, not for a branching, decisive law to be laid out across the world with absolutly no consideration for the individuals view - especially when that same law actually removes the right of ownership/creationship from the artist and grants it to a profit-seeking corporation.

What do you mean by "absolutly no consideration for the individuals view"? They signed a contract giving up their ownership of the work.

Quote from Leyasu

I believe it should be for the individual to decide, not for a branching, decisive law to be laid out across the world with absolutly no consideration for the individuals view - especially when that same law actually removes the right of ownership/creationship from the artist and grants it to a profit-seeking corporation.

Who is "the individual" in this case? If I produce twelve beautiful tracks of music and distribute them (either myself or through a distribution deal that retains my ownership of my music) to anyone who wants to buy a copy for $15, then are you saying that you think that if some person in Reykjavik buys a copy they should be able to give away my hard work? Am I the individual or are they? Jonathan Coulton distributed much of his music with a pay what you think is fair system with wild success, but he still owns the rights to his music and it's use. Should the UAA have the right to ignore that IP and redistribute his music?

Please try to keep on topic. Water Cooler Talk or Debate would be good places to continue this discussion if you so desire (and you're welcome to post a link to a new thread there here if you wish). Thanks.

i like this card, it what i need in my modern discard control deck that i am working on.
(it just sucks i wont get it till at least a year when i will no longer will care for it.)

The card is decent, I think it would be great to build around. Atleast I'll try to.:-/

HURRY UP AND PRINT THIS ALREADY!

I'll take 4 foils as soon as they're available thanks! Who cares what people think it will do for Standard?

Quote from Rizso

If they really want this card to be somewhat playable it needs to be something you can build arround that means the discard triggers happening when you discard as well. The card is way to unreliable. If it would trigger when you discard as well, you can run enablers and get an card advantech engine going.

It would either still be awful or would just make Liliana even more absurd. No thanks.

I do wish we would get some kind of release date on this card and it stays at this mana cost....it may not be standard playable(depending on what kind of discard is there with it come release) but my Nath and Nekusar edh wants this asap

If they discard an enchantment creature do you get both a token and a draw a card or do you choose?

The card in itself is fine, but I can imagine that lots of noobs in the fun room online will use it as an excuse to scrape 20+ discard spells together and call it a deck. Not looking forward to the month it takes for those players to realize that a deck has to have more than a one card plan to work.

Quote from Duke Daemon

Sir you can keep your Waste Not and I will play the rack! Then we shall see which jhonny deck wins sir!

Tbh if this card was in standard it wouldn't do too bad, with thoughtseize, duress & Ordeal of Erebos. Could work, maybe.

The card really asks for "massiv" discard, much in the form of Wheel of Fortune , Windfall and other specific cards that give a huge amount of discard right away.

If you can use it with that kind of effects on opponents (best multiple) , it becomes a pretty devastating card (which allows to win on the spot).


However thats what the card mainly is, a build around me Jonny card, but its not really particular constructed worthy as its such a niche card.

Indeed it seems to need cards like:

• Jace's Archivist
  
• Burning Inquiry
  
• Careful Consideration
  
• Lore Broker
  
• Reforge the Soul
  
• Urza's Guilt
  
• Wheel and Deal
  
• Wistful Thinking

All of these cards are in themselves rather double-edged and not particularly powerful so you'll need to tune up with Liliana's Caress to have additional win-cons to run through the discard-engine.

I thought about Whispering Madness but so far I'm having difficulties trying to figure out how to utilize the Cipher-portion of it, not to mention that it may be way too late to actually gain anything from it.

So far I think the best candidates are:

• Wistful Thinking
  
• Burning Inquiry
  
• Careful Consideration
  
• Urza's Guilt

Then add up with Thoughtseize, Brainstorm, Liliana's Caress and some creature removal and counter magic.

You could always leave out Red and Burning Inquiry, but it's just such an efficient enabler and may disrupt your opponent a lot.

A great weakness I spot is an unaccounted lack of use for the black ritual-effect. I didn't calculate what you would actually use that mana for.

Wistful Thinking, Careful Consideration and Urza's Guilt in Legacy?

Ha... Haha... HAHAHAHAHAHAHA