I picked up 1000 Modern Masters commons/uncommons for $50 on Ebay. The seller openly removed the three most expensive cards, but the rest is completely random, so I have pretty much a complete 4x commons/uncommons playset. Things I am missing:
So to make a complete 4/2 commons/uncommons cube for kitchen-table drafting, I need to grab a couple of each of those... should set me back about $30.
I wouldn't mind spicing it up with some rares, but MM rares can get pretty expensive. Anyone got any good ideas for some rares to drop into the cube as singletons that would complement the MM commons/uncommons?
Hi, I'm enjoying this whole Magic 2.0 discussion. My wife and I have only been playing Magic for a couple of months now, but it's becoming obvious that some significant proportion of our games are complete walk-overs, as one or other of us simply doesn't get started due to screwage.
I love the idea of being able to trade a non-land for a basic land, and vice versa, but I also appreciate the comments that the cards and game have been developed/tested/balanced in an environment where lumpy land distribution is part of the game's necessary randomness. This makes me wary of changes that would make it almost trivial to get one land on the table per turn for the first six turns. It might turn out to be a non-issue, but I'm naturally sceptical.
So... if the proposed free land/non-land exchange turns out to be TOO much, how about increasing the cost of each exchange as we go? For example, my first exchange would be 1-for-1, my second would be 2-for-1, etc. This would be simple to implement - it's a little reminiscent of the escalating cost for rolling the Planechase dice - and would effectively make exchanges much rarer. One or two exchanges per player per game, I imagine, but with the possibility that players could push it further. I prefer this kind of ramped cost to a simple 2-exchange limit, or similar, as it puts the tactical decisions in the players' hands.
Anyway, that's just a little twist I thought I'd throw into the mix. I haven't tested Magic 2.0, 1.5, or any other no-screw variant yet, but I'm keen to start. For now, my wife has been winning the screw-wars, so it might be difficult to persuade her ;-)
Thanks heaps,
LBB
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I picked up 1000 Modern Masters commons/uncommons for $50 on Ebay. The seller openly removed the three most expensive cards, but the rest is completely random, so I have pretty much a complete 4x commons/uncommons playset. Things I am missing:
* Executioner's Capsule
* Kitchen Finks
* Lightning Helix
* Path to Exile
* Spell Snare
So to make a complete 4/2 commons/uncommons cube for kitchen-table drafting, I need to grab a couple of each of those... should set me back about $30.
I wouldn't mind spicing it up with some rares, but MM rares can get pretty expensive. Anyone got any good ideas for some rares to drop into the cube as singletons that would complement the MM commons/uncommons?
Any other thoughts?
Thanks heaps,
Birdy.
I love the idea of being able to trade a non-land for a basic land, and vice versa, but I also appreciate the comments that the cards and game have been developed/tested/balanced in an environment where lumpy land distribution is part of the game's necessary randomness. This makes me wary of changes that would make it almost trivial to get one land on the table per turn for the first six turns. It might turn out to be a non-issue, but I'm naturally sceptical.
So... if the proposed free land/non-land exchange turns out to be TOO much, how about increasing the cost of each exchange as we go? For example, my first exchange would be 1-for-1, my second would be 2-for-1, etc. This would be simple to implement - it's a little reminiscent of the escalating cost for rolling the Planechase dice - and would effectively make exchanges much rarer. One or two exchanges per player per game, I imagine, but with the possibility that players could push it further. I prefer this kind of ramped cost to a simple 2-exchange limit, or similar, as it puts the tactical decisions in the players' hands.
Anyway, that's just a little twist I thought I'd throw into the mix. I haven't tested Magic 2.0, 1.5, or any other no-screw variant yet, but I'm keen to start. For now, my wife has been winning the screw-wars, so it might be difficult to persuade her ;-)
Thanks heaps,
LBB