I see a lot of debates on here about whether Modern is an eternal format. Who cares? How is saying whether it an eternal format change the fact that cards don't rotate like Standard? I mean, am I missing something here?
Eternal formats include cards released in special sets (like commander decks, or the upcoming conspiracy).
Modern is not eternal because it does not allow such cards.
"Eternal" formats also don't have cards that rotate out of them. The two eternal formats are Vintage and Legacy. It isn't a debate, eternal formats aren't subjective. They have a concrete definition, and are laid out as what they are. Modern doesn't fit that description, so it isn't eternal.
This is the sort of trick question that gets other people once, then after you explain why they're wrong they go "uh, okayyyyy".
"Is Modern an Eternal format?"
"Yes, it doesn't ro-"
"BZZZT! Eternal means stuff from Commander and Planechase are legal too LOL!"
Another example:
"How many fingers do humans have?"
"Ten."
"BZZZT! Humans have 8 fingers and 2 thumbs LOL!"
This is so true.
For what it's worth, I consider Modern an eternal format because to me the non-rotating feature is the decisive one. But the term 'eternal format' was coined before Modern existed and has not aged well.
This is the sort of trick question that gets other people once, then after you explain why they're wrong they go "uh, okayyyyy".
"Is Modern an Eternal format?"
"Yes, it doesn't ro-"
"BZZZT! Eternal means stuff from Commander and Planechase are legal too LOL!"
Another example:
"How many fingers do humans have?"
"Ten."
"BZZZT! Humans have 8 fingers and 2 thumbs LOL!"
Nah there's a big difference. People are just dumb when it comes to vernacular. It's important to be clear with this stuff. What's dumb is that it's a "debate." It's a fact.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Currently Playing:
Modern: UWUW TronUW
Legacy: WDeath N TaxesW CEldrazi C
If you couldn't tell I hate greedy blue decks.
I see a lot of debates on here about whether Modern is an eternal format. Who cares? How is saying whether it an eternal format change the fact that cards don't rotate like Standard? I mean, am I missing something here?
I think the definition is kind of pointless. The thing I like about Modern is that it's not bogged down by the reserved list, which ironically could be the demise of legacy (an eternal format) one day, so I think eternal is a bit of a misnomer.
I think a lot the confusion stems from the fact that cards do not rotate out of Modern, and thus many people (incorrectly) assign the term eternal to describe the format, because they feel their Modern-legal cards "live forever" due to never rotating out.
I will confess to making this error myself on occasions in the past. Sploops!
Eternal formats include cards released in special sets (like commander decks, or the upcoming conspiracy).
Modern is not eternal because it does not allow such cards.
And thank heavens for that! Quite frankly, this is one of Moderns biggest selling points. I hate, hate, hate those damn cards, and if things like True Name Nemesis started being legal in Modern, I'd likely quit the format, and quite frankly most aspects of the game, altogether. Print it in Standard first, and if you can't do that then don't print it at all. I know I am in the VAST minority on this, but I'm a cranky old man and thats the ways I sees it!
I'm calling modern an eternal format, the bigger and more important distinction is the non-rotation, not the aux set inclusion. The non-rotating makes me associate it as what i've called 'one of big three', which used to include extended as formats outside of draft that I care about-- even if that did rotate, they are the adult formats.
As stated multiple times above, until im allowed baleful strix for UB tezzerator its not an eternal format.
And thank god its not or the banlist would be bigger with cards like truename nemesis and sylvan libary.
Not really.
It only depends on the power level that Modern should have which just brings up the other debate about if Modern should be closer to Standard or to Legacy.
And yes I have no problems with people calling Modern a eternal format since being non-rotating is the most important part and not the part about allowing cards from supplemental products.
Besides who said that Wizards can't just change that when they deem it necessary?
Ermahgerd. Everyone can call modern whatever they want. They can debate it as much as they want. The thing is, it isn't a question of "what's better, X or Y." This is less of a debate than if pluto is a planet.
Wizards defines what formats are eternal and what are not.
I see all this discussion of "supplemental products being allowed/disallowed isn't a factor for me" or "the non-rotating part is more important". You realize that this is all technically wrong. Just because the property holds more weight in someone's opinion, it does not mean that property must not be true. For something to be an eternal format, it must have all the properties of an eternal format, else it is not. That is to say, Modern is an eternal format iff it has these properties x, y, and z, which is also equivalently the format is not an eternal format if it does not have one of the properties x, y, and z.
To put it into context, as someone else pointed out, you can use the square-rectangle argument. If you can argue that "the non-rotating part is more important", I could similarly argue that a square having 4 sides is more important, so then all rectangles are squares via that property.
It's a matter of logic; it either is or isn't something if we can clearly define the properties. Every property necessary can be assigned a boolean value, and thus the sum of those values determines the result.
PS. I had to chime in because I'm OCD and because people blatantly disregarding logic just feels wrong to me.
I see what you're saying Darksteel88, but as far as I'm concerned, unless a new player is asking about a special set that he wants to use in Modern I don't think it's illogical to say it's an eternal format with one condition. Now I don't think it's right to call it an eternal format, but like pizzap said, that descriptor should be irrelevant since you can just check a set's legality online.
Ths human brain learns by going from the "known" to the "unknown". Quite simply, it's easier for the majority of players to think of it as "Eternal with a difference" rather than a (dare I say it...) modern format that acts independent of all other formats around it. Personally I just circumvent the issue entirely and refer to the format as what it is: modern.
Ok. Fair enough. No one is splitting hairs. Did you see the title of the post? "Is modern an eternal format?" The answer is no.
If the title was "Should i save my snapcasters to use in modern because it is eternal" and i turned around and shouted about how it isn't eternal, i could see how you would draw this conclusion and talk about how it doesn't add to the discussion.
You can't tell me that saying "No, modern is not an eternal format" does not add to the conversation about "Is modern an eternal format."
If everyone wants to have a discussion about anything other than if modern is an eternal format, like if it SHOULD BE listed as an eternal format, that should be done in a separate thread.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Whats the big deal about black lotus you ask? Well you see, there is no big deal about it. It IS the big deal.
I see what you're saying Darksteel88, but as far as I'm concerned, unless a new player is asking about a special set that he wants to use in Modern I don't think it's illogical to say it's an eternal format with one condition. Now I don't think it's right to call it an eternal format, but like pizzap said, that descriptor should be irrelevant since you can just check a set's legality online.
Ths human brain learns by going from the "known" to the "unknown". Quite simply, it's easier for the majority of players to think of it as "Eternal with a difference" rather than a (dare I say it...) modern format that acts independent of all other formats around it. Personally I just circumvent the issue entirely and refer to the format as what it is: modern.
It's perfectly fine to think of it as "eternal with a difference" as you stated, because if I ask the yes or no question 'is it eternal?' the answer is no. The answer of whether it is eternal cannot be true, it simply doesn't meet the criteria necessary, this is plain, undeniable logic. As long as you specify that there's some condition attached, that's perfectly fine. I can describe a isosceles triangle as being an equilateral triangle except 'only two sides are of equal length'. That condition adds another premise to the whole argument; the original statement (in this case Modern is eternal) is still false.
I see what you're saying Darksteel88, but as far as I'm concerned, unless a new player is asking about a special set that he wants to use in Modern I don't think it's illogical to say it's an eternal format with one condition. Now I don't think it's right to call it an eternal format, but like pizzap said, that descriptor should be irrelevant since you can just check a set's legality online.
Ths human brain learns by going from the "known" to the "unknown". Quite simply, it's easier for the majority of players to think of it as "Eternal with a difference" rather than a (dare I say it...) modern format that acts independent of all other formats around it. Personally I just circumvent the issue entirely and refer to the format as what it is: modern.
It's perfectly fine to think of it as "eternal with a difference" as you stated, because if I ask the yes or no question 'is it eternal?' the answer is no. The answer of whether it is eternal cannot be true, it simply doesn't meet the criteria necessary, this is plain, undeniable logic. As long as you specify that there's some condition attached, that's perfectly fine. I can describe a isosceles triangle as being an equilateral triangle except 'only two sides are of equal length'. That condition adds another premise to the whole argument; the original statement (in this case Modern is eternal) is still false.
Is Archangel of Thune played in any eternal formats? I'm thinking picking one up for EDH isn't worth it yet
The top commenter points out Angel of Thune is played in Modern. Sooner or later someone will point out that Modern is not an eternal format, but a non-rotating format. Will that improve the discussion? Absolutely not!
EDIT: As an experiment, I made that comment now with a gimmick account. So far, I saw 1 upvote (probably of the commenter, who is now excusing himself for overlooking this fact) and 1 downvote (of someone who thinks this doesn't add to the discussion). Let's see where it goes from here.
My little experiment yielded clear results: people don't like this nonsense and downvoted my comment to oblivion. If someone says Modern is eternal, please don't correct it, because it is pedantic and not relevant.
I think this is the key. What exactly is the use of specifying Modern as not eternal? In the past formats were either eternal, or rotating. Modern doesn't rotate, yet is technically not eternal because of the magic communities definition of eternal. I'd argue that it makes sense to allow the agreed upon definition of eternal to change from, contains every card, to nonrotating. Eternal does after all, outside of the context of magic, mean forever
Alright so I typed that all up and then thought about what eternal means again and realized that the truth is that eternal doesn't just mean lasting forever, it means something has always and will always exist. Modern has a beginning so while it will always last forever it is not eternal.
And all that being said I think the actual goal should be to convince people to start using the term nonrotating, or something similar, to specify when they mean pretty much everything aside from standard.
Original question: Is Archangel of Thune played in any eternal formats? I'm thinking picking one up for EDH isn't worth it yet
A (top commenter): It sees modern play as a 1of in pod lists because it combos with spike feeder.
B (my downvoted gimmick/troll): Modern is not an eternal format, but a non-rotating format.
C (third random person): You shouldn't be getting downvoted, this is true, look it up people. It has to include cards from all of magic to be "technically" eternal.
D (person voicing the popular opinion): While technically correct, when people ask about eternal formats, they typically mean Modern, Legacy, and Vintage.
Person D is correct. Listen to him/her!
No. Person A is correct. Because Person A is the only one who actually answered the question. Which is what should be happening here. The question was, "Is modern an eternal format" the answer is a concrete "no." We have an official list of eternal formats, and modern is not on that list, meaning it is not currently an eternal format.
Whether it should be, what cards are played in it, how popular it is, or anything other than that should be discussed in its OWN FORUM TOPIC.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Whats the big deal about black lotus you ask? Well you see, there is no big deal about it. It IS the big deal.
Nah there's a big difference. People are just dumb when it comes to vernacular. It's important to be clear with this stuff. What's dumb is that it's a "debate." It's a fact.
Agreed. For a game that is defined by stringent adherence to the use of language, I can never understand why players feel there is subjectivity between the terms "eternal" and "non-rotating." I guess it's for the same reason we seek experts to resolve complicated interactions. Even when there are rules and guidelines, everyone will have an individual perspective on it. I guess there is still a veil of subjectivity in objectivity.
I guess my original point I was trying to make is that does this technicality really matter? I mean, if people are discussing about Modern cards (or whatever for that matter) and someone mentions "eternal format," immediately correcting that person and changing the discussion to being about what defines an eternal format doesn't really do anything to contribute to the original discussion.
I think the issue is that it's perceived a loaded question when in fact the entire debate is fueled by the passion of people who are incredibly insistent on proper terminology (and why wouldn't you be!? Words mean things!).
It's like getting a rise out of someone by using the word "irregardless."
There are two "Eternal Formats" in MTG. Those are Vintage and Legacy. This is even defined by Wizards on its site inmultipleplaces, so there is absolutely no need to debate it.
Modern is a "constructed format", not an eternal format. Discussion closed. Now I'm going to lock down this thread before people get too far into flaming territory
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Modern is not eternal because it does not allow such cards.
http://wiki.mtgsalvation.com/article/Eternal_(format)
anything that fits the definition of a legal Magic card is fair game. Black/white border, standard Deckmaster back, etc.
Non-rotating format:
a format with a defined domain whose characteristic is that nothing expires in that format.
In this regard, all eternal formats are non-rotating, but not all non-rotating formats are eternal. It's a square-rectangle relationship.
"Is Modern an Eternal format?"
"Yes, it doesn't ro-"
"BZZZT! Eternal means stuff from Commander and Planechase are legal too LOL!"
Another example:
"How many fingers do humans have?"
"Ten."
"BZZZT! Humans have 8 fingers and 2 thumbs LOL!"
| Ad Nauseam
| Infect
Big Johnny.
This is so true.
For what it's worth, I consider Modern an eternal format because to me the non-rotating feature is the decisive one. But the term 'eternal format' was coined before Modern existed and has not aged well.
Nah there's a big difference. People are just dumb when it comes to vernacular. It's important to be clear with this stuff. What's dumb is that it's a "debate." It's a fact.
Modern:
UWUW TronUW
Legacy:
WDeath N TaxesW
CEldrazi C
If you couldn't tell I hate greedy blue decks.
Vintage
WWhite Trash
I think the definition is kind of pointless. The thing I like about Modern is that it's not bogged down by the reserved list, which ironically could be the demise of legacy (an eternal format) one day, so I think eternal is a bit of a misnomer.
I will confess to making this error myself on occasions in the past. Sploops!
And thank heavens for that! Quite frankly, this is one of Moderns biggest selling points. I hate, hate, hate those damn cards, and if things like True Name Nemesis started being legal in Modern, I'd likely quit the format, and quite frankly most aspects of the game, altogether. Print it in Standard first, and if you can't do that then don't print it at all. I know I am in the VAST minority on this, but I'm a cranky old man and thats the ways I sees it!
How To Keep Your FOIL Cards From Curling: http://youtu.be/QTmubrS8VnI
The Best Deck Boxes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEwgLph_Pjk
The Best Binders: http://youtu.be/H5IauASYWjk
Not really.
It only depends on the power level that Modern should have which just brings up the other debate about if Modern should be closer to Standard or to Legacy.
And yes I have no problems with people calling Modern a eternal format since being non-rotating is the most important part and not the part about allowing cards from supplemental products.
Besides who said that Wizards can't just change that when they deem it necessary?
Wizards defines what formats are eternal and what are not.
http://wiki.mtgsalvation.com/article/Eternal_(format)
To put it into context, as someone else pointed out, you can use the square-rectangle argument. If you can argue that "the non-rotating part is more important", I could similarly argue that a square having 4 sides is more important, so then all rectangles are squares via that property.
It's a matter of logic; it either is or isn't something if we can clearly define the properties. Every property necessary can be assigned a boolean value, and thus the sum of those values determines the result.
PS. I had to chime in because I'm OCD and because people blatantly disregarding logic just feels wrong to me.
Grixis Death's Shadow, Jund, UW Tron, Jeskai Control, Storm, Counters Company, Eldrazi Tron, Affinity, Living End, Infect, Merfolk, Dredge, Ad Nauseam, Amulet, Bogles, Eldrazi Tron, Mono U Tron, Lantern, Mardu Pyromancer
Ths human brain learns by going from the "known" to the "unknown". Quite simply, it's easier for the majority of players to think of it as "Eternal with a difference" rather than a (dare I say it...) modern format that acts independent of all other formats around it. Personally I just circumvent the issue entirely and refer to the format as what it is: modern.
Modern: UBR Cruel Control
Standard: GW Aggro
If the title was "Should i save my snapcasters to use in modern because it is eternal" and i turned around and shouted about how it isn't eternal, i could see how you would draw this conclusion and talk about how it doesn't add to the discussion.
You can't tell me that saying "No, modern is not an eternal format" does not add to the conversation about "Is modern an eternal format."
If everyone wants to have a discussion about anything other than if modern is an eternal format, like if it SHOULD BE listed as an eternal format, that should be done in a separate thread.
It's perfectly fine to think of it as "eternal with a difference" as you stated, because if I ask the yes or no question 'is it eternal?' the answer is no. The answer of whether it is eternal cannot be true, it simply doesn't meet the criteria necessary, this is plain, undeniable logic. As long as you specify that there's some condition attached, that's perfectly fine. I can describe a isosceles triangle as being an equilateral triangle except 'only two sides are of equal length'. That condition adds another premise to the whole argument; the original statement (in this case Modern is eternal) is still false.
Grixis Death's Shadow, Jund, UW Tron, Jeskai Control, Storm, Counters Company, Eldrazi Tron, Affinity, Living End, Infect, Merfolk, Dredge, Ad Nauseam, Amulet, Bogles, Eldrazi Tron, Mono U Tron, Lantern, Mardu Pyromancer
I think this is the key. What exactly is the use of specifying Modern as not eternal? In the past formats were either eternal, or rotating. Modern doesn't rotate, yet is technically not eternal because of the magic communities definition of eternal. I'd argue that it makes sense to allow the agreed upon definition of eternal to change from, contains every card, to nonrotating. Eternal does after all, outside of the context of magic, mean foreverAlright so I typed that all up and then thought about what eternal means again and realized that the truth is that eternal doesn't just mean lasting forever, it means something has always and will always exist. Modern has a beginning so while it will always last forever it is not eternal.
And all that being said I think the actual goal should be to convince people to start using the term nonrotating, or something similar, to specify when they mean pretty much everything aside from standard.
No. Person A is correct. Because Person A is the only one who actually answered the question. Which is what should be happening here. The question was, "Is modern an eternal format" the answer is a concrete "no." We have an official list of eternal formats, and modern is not on that list, meaning it is not currently an eternal format.
Whether it should be, what cards are played in it, how popular it is, or anything other than that should be discussed in its OWN FORUM TOPIC.
Agreed. For a game that is defined by stringent adherence to the use of language, I can never understand why players feel there is subjectivity between the terms "eternal" and "non-rotating." I guess it's for the same reason we seek experts to resolve complicated interactions. Even when there are rules and guidelines, everyone will have an individual perspective on it. I guess there is still a veil of subjectivity in objectivity.
It's like getting a rise out of someone by using the word "irregardless."
Its like someone knowing "irregardless" isn't a real word and yet they insist on using it.
People are correcting you because you sound "stupid"
Infracted for Flaming. ~Lantern
Modern is a "constructed format", not an eternal format. Discussion closed. Now I'm going to lock down this thread before people get too far into flaming territory