Because Horsemanship is a functional reprint of flying, full stop. The only reason it was ever used at all was the desire to do a real world themed set where flying simply didn't fit, but needed to exist mechanically.
The only way they ever use it again is if they are under similar constraints again, which means that a set that simply can't use flying for whatever thematic reason but still needs it to exist for mechanical reasons.
Ah yes, you mean the set that Wizards completely overprinted that was white border and full of mostly junk that no one wanted? I can see how that could destroy the market.
No, yeah, I'm sure you are right, it was no big deal. It's not like it was serious enough to result in a public apology and force their hand on a promised reprint policy that they have stuck with for 18 years or anything.
I don't care what anyone says. Wizards COULD have put 4x Thoughtseize, 4x Marsh Flats, 4x Fetid Heath, 4x Auriok Champion and hell, even 4x Bitterblossom in this deck if they wanted to. No, it is not unreasonable, even if it made the deck worth a grand (even I wasn't expecting that, but still). I have not heard one valid argument as to why they couldn't do it.
How about because when they did this back in Chronicles, it almost killed the game?
Lots of in demand cards that people wanted were reprinted in large quantity. It destroyed the value of most of those cards, but more importantly, it destroyed the illusion that a square of printed cardboard holds any intrinsic value. This resulted in many people no longer having any interest in collecting cards that could be made worthless at any time. It took an incredible amount of time and effort on Wizards part to rebuild that, and they are't fool enough to tear it down again.
the truth of the matter is that Wizards could simply print more.
While they could, they learned that lesson way back in Chronicles. People get very upset when the price of their collectibles crashes. A significant part of what keeps people buying and collecting what is essentially worthless printed cardboard squares is the feeling of collectibility and value, and that only comes from an artificially induced scarcity. Wizards knows very well that if cards are seen as something that could be worth next to nothing tomorrow if they put them in an event deck, people will be less willing to collect them in the first place.
The whole idea that one bit of printed card can be worth vastly more than another only holds up if you are incredibly careful about how you print things.
I seem to recall patch notes stating that both of those bugs have been fixed, regarding ashiok and jace.
From what I've seen, WOTC is pretty quick to fix card bugs that affect Standard or Modern cards. Outside of that, it gets really shaky, I was waiting well over a year for them to fix Kaervek's torch, to the point that by the time they did, the deck I'd played it in was banned. For tournament unsupported formats like commander, I don't think they ever check and fix broken interactions.
I would define a bug that gives you an advantage as a situation where you gain the ability to do something that the card is not entitled to do that advances your game or hinders your opponent.
A great example would be the living death exiling commanders without returning them, it's possible to use that bug to gain an advantage by casting it when your own commander is not in play. By contrast, there is no way to gain advantage from the fact that your Vesuva cannot correctly copy a cavern. It makes the card strictly worse to play, because it lacks an ability it should have, rather than gaining an ability it should not have.
If your criteria for banning a card is that it doesn't function perfectly with any other single card in the game, things are going to get interesting, because I can find one heck of a long list of cards with at least one such similar broken interaction, including all sorts of commander staples.
It seems like a better way to deal with broken cards that don't give an advantage is to simply post a rule that says if you play a bugged card, you take full responsibility for any losses the bug causes you.
Full those thinking that WotC took the notes down. It is entirely possible WE took them down. A surge of linking to the notes could theoretically overwhelm WotC's servers...
Nope, during that window, the page loaded quickly, it simply loaded as a mostly empty page saying you did not have permission to view the page.
Someone posted it by mistake, caught it right away, then looked at the internet and saw it was too late anyway, so it was put back up.
Why is it that they can make that work in an intuitive way for Planeswalkers, where you can only have one version of a given "character" in play, but they can't make it work for other cards?
Why is everyone only talking about Springleaf Drum when it comes to Inspired abilities? Me I want to dump a Witch's Eye on them so hard!
That much is simple enough.
Springleaf drum has an activated ability requiring you to tap a creature, while witch's eye grants a creature an activated ability that has tap in the cost. This means that a freshly cast creature *can* be tapped the same turn with springleaf, while it would have to wait for the *next* turn to be tapped with eye.
That's not even looking at the fact that drum generates a mana, and doesn't need to be equipped, while eye costs a mana to equip it, and another mana to actually use it.
You remove his top deck == land , and makes hin draw the next card that might be good for hin ?
That is far and away the most backward reasoning I've heard all day.
There is -0- statistical difference between your opponent drawing the top card of their library, or the card underneath it. Either of the two cards is equally likely of being an unneeded land, or a vital bomb.
Horsemanship is not a real mechanic. It is nothing more than flying renamed so that it could be included in a special semi-historical themed set.
Because Horsemanship is a functional reprint of flying, full stop. The only reason it was ever used at all was the desire to do a real world themed set where flying simply didn't fit, but needed to exist mechanically.
The only way they ever use it again is if they are under similar constraints again, which means that a set that simply can't use flying for whatever thematic reason but still needs it to exist for mechanical reasons.
No, yeah, I'm sure you are right, it was no big deal. It's not like it was serious enough to result in a public apology and force their hand on a promised reprint policy that they have stuck with for 18 years or anything.
How about because when they did this back in Chronicles, it almost killed the game?
Lots of in demand cards that people wanted were reprinted in large quantity. It destroyed the value of most of those cards, but more importantly, it destroyed the illusion that a square of printed cardboard holds any intrinsic value. This resulted in many people no longer having any interest in collecting cards that could be made worthless at any time. It took an incredible amount of time and effort on Wizards part to rebuild that, and they are't fool enough to tear it down again.
While they could, they learned that lesson way back in Chronicles. People get very upset when the price of their collectibles crashes. A significant part of what keeps people buying and collecting what is essentially worthless printed cardboard squares is the feeling of collectibility and value, and that only comes from an artificially induced scarcity. Wizards knows very well that if cards are seen as something that could be worth next to nothing tomorrow if they put them in an event deck, people will be less willing to collect them in the first place.
The whole idea that one bit of printed card can be worth vastly more than another only holds up if you are incredibly careful about how you print things.
From what I've seen, WOTC is pretty quick to fix card bugs that affect Standard or Modern cards. Outside of that, it gets really shaky, I was waiting well over a year for them to fix Kaervek's torch, to the point that by the time they did, the deck I'd played it in was banned. For tournament unsupported formats like commander, I don't think they ever check and fix broken interactions.
A great example would be the living death exiling commanders without returning them, it's possible to use that bug to gain an advantage by casting it when your own commander is not in play. By contrast, there is no way to gain advantage from the fact that your Vesuva cannot correctly copy a cavern. It makes the card strictly worse to play, because it lacks an ability it should have, rather than gaining an ability it should not have.
It seems like a better way to deal with broken cards that don't give an advantage is to simply post a rule that says if you play a bugged card, you take full responsibility for any losses the bug causes you.
How does this justify a ban on vesuva?
The bug means vesuva doesn't allow you to use all abilities correctly when copying one card. It doesn't give any sort of advantage.
Leōnidēs; "son of the lion"
Nope, during that window, the page loaded quickly, it simply loaded as a mostly empty page saying you did not have permission to view the page.
Someone posted it by mistake, caught it right away, then looked at the internet and saw it was too late anyway, so it was put back up.
Why is it that they can make that work in an intuitive way for Planeswalkers, where you can only have one version of a given "character" in play, but they can't make it work for other cards?
That much is simple enough.
Springleaf drum has an activated ability requiring you to tap a creature, while witch's eye grants a creature an activated ability that has tap in the cost. This means that a freshly cast creature *can* be tapped the same turn with springleaf, while it would have to wait for the *next* turn to be tapped with eye.
That's not even looking at the fact that drum generates a mana, and doesn't need to be equipped, while eye costs a mana to equip it, and another mana to actually use it.
That is far and away the most backward reasoning I've heard all day.
There is -0- statistical difference between your opponent drawing the top card of their library, or the card underneath it. Either of the two cards is equally likely of being an unneeded land, or a vital bomb.