My pool sucked. Had Gideon, Ally of Zendikar but not a lot of white support. What really sucked was my promo was Captain's Claws. Then two, yes TWO of my rares were Captain's Claws. So three total. Surge was pretty use with the 2HD format, but Cohort wasn't. Having to tap two creatures for one action didn't work. No one was really pulling it off effectively. There were enough allys in the anyone's pool though.
That pool sounds really good based on that. Captain's Claws is very good card, espeacially when you have multiples you can really focus playing as many 2-drops as you can and all combat tricks you have. And then you have Gideon.
That was my plan, but I didn't get enough two drops. I never had enough creatures to attack to beat them down. Most of my pool was 3 and 5s. I was really hoping to get the claws and Gideon out together but it never happened. Had that happened my games might have went much different. The claws didn't suck, it was more the lack of options to use them with outside Gideon. Useful card though because it could go in any color.
Back to original post about thoughts, like someone else commented B was pretty strong. Most people seemed to be playing it and the removal and tricks it pulled off really put me in a bind. As far as going with colorless mana, I feel there are enough cards to splash it at the minimum. Everyone had either a couple lands or creatures to produce it.
My pool sucked. Had Gideon, Ally of Zendikar but not a lot of white support. What really sucked was my promo was Captain's Claws. Then two, yes TWO of my rares were Captain's Claws. So three total. Surge was pretty use with the 2HD format, but Cohort wasn't. Having to tap two creatures for one action didn't work. No one was really pulling it off effectively. There were enough allys in the anyone's pool though.
Depending on skill level, an idea for the first time would be to split the group into 2 and play one game. If you try to watch and monitor 10 games of beginners at once by yourself it will be a disaster. If you have help, do that many games.
Think of it as a teacher doing a demo in front of the whole class before letting the class try on their own. Also I agree about using simple prebuilt decks with creatures. Too many mechanics and card types will overwhelm the players and your trying to explain them. Good luck and keep it simple.
I don't see a way to preview a thread in the Trading Post before starting. Can you let me know where it is or add that option.
Also, I really like the ability to search trades by cards in the trading post. Is there a way to search more than a single card in the Wants or Haves? If not, it would be a nice option to decide whether you are looking for a poster with All of the cards or Any.
As others have stated, the site is extremely sluggish and loading slowly. Especially when I compare it to another forum I am a part of. The other one is loading at least twice as fast. Hopefully this is simply because of all the work being done to the new site right now.
I am always of the mindset that you treat other how you want to be treated. If I was in the other guys shoes, I would appreciate not being taken advantage of. I'm glad you did the right thing and I hope the karma comes back to you double with your pulls and draws in tournaments.
It's also good to earn respect of players where they are more likely to trade with you and take your opinion. You are also more likely to be invited to play again and you didn't put your friend in a bad spot. It could get frustrating for him having a neighbor that is upset because his friend ripped him in a trade.
Like others have said, I would ask to see if they would let you preregister. It wouldn't hurt to ask.
Also, if you haven't be sure to let the owner know that it has been full. This could be important information if they have been thinking about moving to a larger venue. The owner might not realize the loss of potential business. If not moving, maybe they will think about adding more tournaments at other times.
It's making use of legislation of violence to terrorize people into changing their actions. I don't see how it being considered a legitimate government matters. We gave up the idea that, because a government does it, it isn't violating human rights a long time ago.
Is there any evidence of violence from those groups? It's beyond absurd to label FRC as terrorist. Hate group, sure. But there is no legislation of violence or terrorizing of people. To claim so seriously lowers any credibility you would have.
I may completely disagree with almost everything that FRC believes, but that doesn't mean they are terrorist. Hyperbole much.
...but there are ways to prevent a business from establishing itself in your town. Aldermen or city councils can refuse to issue building permits; that's basically the whole concept of zoning laws. It's sort of crazy to assume the opposite, that the current population have no choice in which businesses set up shop in their town.
This couldn't be more wrong. It's crazy to allow a government to ban businesses based on their religious beliefs. There is exactly ZERO evidence that CFA as a business discriminates. Therefore they should have every right to put a fast food business where any other fast food business is allowed. If the population doesn't like it, they don't have to eat there and eventually they would go out of business. You can not zone out religion. All threats by politicians are idle and would never hold up in court.
Some drinks and a sandwich certainly make up for the terrorist organizations they are funding. I've never had one, but this must be some damn good chicken.
We sure have some liberal definitions of "terrorist organizations." I remember the days when terrorist organizations were ones that used some form of violence. I hardly think donating to an organization that uses the established political process to achieve its goals constitutes as terrorist.
Old cards smelled better. New packs smell too mainstream.
I'd agree about the old packs, but the new ones smell nice too. I love the smell of fresh cards. They should make an air freshener shaped like a magic card to give off that smell.
Tax fraud? That's an absurd analysis of this situation. If he sold the product for $25, how much tax would he have had to pay on it? (Clearly the tax isn't going to be more than $5). To avoid paying this small amount of tax, the shopkeeper decides to drop the price from $25 to $5 (i.e. the shopkeeper decides to lose $20)? Do you really think anybody in their right mind would do this?
Haven't you figured out the business sense of most posters yet? So many people think they could teach grad school business classes.
Credit card fees are ridiculous, and I wouldn't fault a LGS owner for taking a small loss if only to avoid paying some of those evil corp. Although a $20 decrease is still a bit crazy.
Super sweet deal! If it really bothers you to take advantage of them then make another purchase with cash sometime. That way you are still supporting them and your conscience can feel better. Since he dropped $20 bucks off the price you were planning to spend, but $20 of merchandise sometime. This way you could sleep better and the store would make more too.
I haven't seen any Counterpunch in my local stores. Slightly off topic though: I usually see Heavenly Inferno the highest on the secondary market, what cards make that deck so valuable?
You cant say that selling for cash that you can walk out with and spend somewhere else is exactly the same as trading for store credit that has already been bought (or bartered for) in that shop, and can only be spent in that shop. You just cant. There are similarities, but they arent the same.
Imagine you and me walk into a shop together. I dont have any money to spend, but I have some cards you want. You have £10. You could spend that £10 on a card, and trade that card with me. You could spend that £10 on a credit note, and trade that with me. Either way, the total available to the store is £10, and the total spent in the store is £10.
Now, imagine instead that I sold you my card for £10 cash. The total available to the store is still £10, but I might choose to walk out without spending anything (because cash IS different to credit). Get it?
~ Tim
Nice example, but it does have some problems. Remember, I never said it is 100% equal to cash, but it can be argued as the same because they are both a form of currency. I'll even concede the point that they are only similar, however they are both issued mediums of exchange, and therefore currency. Currency does not need to be issued by a government, but by any group.
If the credit is not a form of currency because it can't be used for exchange because of a "non-transferable" clause with the credit, then everything is a moot point and the credit has no value.
The OP was accepting currency(not cash) in a store without helping the store. Your example doesn't match what happened though. The store credit was issued from cards, not cash. The store then received their credit back for more cards. The store has facilitated an exchange of cards and received no financial compensation.
Trading can help shops, but it can also hurt in some situations. It is a difficult balance for LGS owners but this one felt the OP crossed the line into competition.
Everyone still seems very confused in this thread.
Trading cards for other cards, is one thing.
Trading in cards to the shop for store credit, is one thing.
Buying credit notes with cash from the shop, is one thing. Trading cards for store credit with another player, is one thing.
Selling cards for cash to another player, is one thing.
None of those things are the same as any of the others. They are all different things. People seem to be using terms for a number of those distinct things interchangeably, and that is causing confusion (it might even be causing people who agree with eachother to think they disagree).
The OP didnt sell cards in someone elses store.
~ Tim
I'd agree with a lot except the bolded parts. You could easily argue store credit is the same as cash. It doesn't matter if it store is a coupon, gift card, or foreign nation currency. They can all be forms of currency: a medium of exchange from a particular government or entity. In this instance, the entity was the LGS.
The player tried to accept a form of currency for his cards in the shop. He was selling. If that player takes that currency and uses it for cards in that same shop, the shop has exchanged cards for cards and received no benefit (assuming the OP didn't spend more than the credit).
The owner was within his right to throw out someone selling cards in his store when might not offer him any financial benefit to keep his store open.
I'm sure a better owner could have managed the situation better, but he had every right to ban the customer from competing in his store.
People seem to be getting confused between trading for cards, trading for store credit, and selling cards (they are separate things), and they also need to remember that Magic is a trading card game, and is sold as such.
~ Tim
But there is no difference between selling for store credit and trading for store credit. It is pretty easy to argue that store credit = cash, since it is still a form of currency and can be used as the equivalency of cash.
The OP said he spent a few hours there and made no purchases there, while trading with the store's customers. These were not the OPs customers, but the stores. Just because you trade in a store, does not guarantee you are helping bring in business. A LGS must strike a balance between allowing an activity that brings in customers, but does not provide too much direct competition. Obviously the store owner felt the balance shifted against his favor too much. The OP was not adding value to the shop, and therefore was asked to leave.
That said, it sounds like the store owner could use a lesson in tact, but most adults I meet certainly could. I'm sure there are plenty of ways the owner could have told the OP he needed to make more purchases or he would lose the ability to trade in his store.
My favorite card is Coat of Arms. I love theme decks and there is so much fun to be had by making all your creatures much bigger with one card. There are so many ways to use it as well.
That was my plan, but I didn't get enough two drops. I never had enough creatures to attack to beat them down. Most of my pool was 3 and 5s. I was really hoping to get the claws and Gideon out together but it never happened. Had that happened my games might have went much different. The claws didn't suck, it was more the lack of options to use them with outside Gideon. Useful card though because it could go in any color.
Back to original post about thoughts, like someone else commented B was pretty strong. Most people seemed to be playing it and the removal and tricks it pulled off really put me in a bind. As far as going with colorless mana, I feel there are enough cards to splash it at the minimum. Everyone had either a couple lands or creatures to produce it.
Think of it as a teacher doing a demo in front of the whole class before letting the class try on their own. Also I agree about using simple prebuilt decks with creatures. Too many mechanics and card types will overwhelm the players and your trying to explain them. Good luck and keep it simple.
Also, I really like the ability to search trades by cards in the trading post. Is there a way to search more than a single card in the Wants or Haves? If not, it would be a nice option to decide whether you are looking for a poster with All of the cards or Any.
As others have stated, the site is extremely sluggish and loading slowly. Especially when I compare it to another forum I am a part of. The other one is loading at least twice as fast. Hopefully this is simply because of all the work being done to the new site right now.
It's also good to earn respect of players where they are more likely to trade with you and take your opinion. You are also more likely to be invited to play again and you didn't put your friend in a bad spot. It could get frustrating for him having a neighbor that is upset because his friend ripped him in a trade.
Also, if you haven't be sure to let the owner know that it has been full. This could be important information if they have been thinking about moving to a larger venue. The owner might not realize the loss of potential business. If not moving, maybe they will think about adding more tournaments at other times.
Is there any evidence of violence from those groups? It's beyond absurd to label FRC as terrorist. Hate group, sure. But there is no legislation of violence or terrorizing of people. To claim so seriously lowers any credibility you would have.
I may completely disagree with almost everything that FRC believes, but that doesn't mean they are terrorist. Hyperbole much.
This couldn't be more wrong. It's crazy to allow a government to ban businesses based on their religious beliefs. There is exactly ZERO evidence that CFA as a business discriminates. Therefore they should have every right to put a fast food business where any other fast food business is allowed. If the population doesn't like it, they don't have to eat there and eventually they would go out of business. You can not zone out religion. All threats by politicians are idle and would never hold up in court.
We sure have some liberal definitions of "terrorist organizations." I remember the days when terrorist organizations were ones that used some form of violence. I hardly think donating to an organization that uses the established political process to achieve its goals constitutes as terrorist.
I'd agree about the old packs, but the new ones smell nice too. I love the smell of fresh cards. They should make an air freshener shaped like a magic card to give off that smell.
Haven't you figured out the business sense of most posters yet? So many people think they could teach grad school business classes.
Credit card fees are ridiculous, and I wouldn't fault a LGS owner for taking a small loss if only to avoid paying some of those evil corp. Although a $20 decrease is still a bit crazy.
Nice example, but it does have some problems. Remember, I never said it is 100% equal to cash, but it can be argued as the same because they are both a form of currency. I'll even concede the point that they are only similar, however they are both issued mediums of exchange, and therefore currency. Currency does not need to be issued by a government, but by any group.
If the credit is not a form of currency because it can't be used for exchange because of a "non-transferable" clause with the credit, then everything is a moot point and the credit has no value.
The OP was accepting currency(not cash) in a store without helping the store. Your example doesn't match what happened though. The store credit was issued from cards, not cash. The store then received their credit back for more cards. The store has facilitated an exchange of cards and received no financial compensation.
Trading can help shops, but it can also hurt in some situations. It is a difficult balance for LGS owners but this one felt the OP crossed the line into competition.
I'd agree with a lot except the bolded parts. You could easily argue store credit is the same as cash. It doesn't matter if it store is a coupon, gift card, or foreign nation currency. They can all be forms of currency: a medium of exchange from a particular government or entity. In this instance, the entity was the LGS.
The player tried to accept a form of currency for his cards in the shop. He was selling. If that player takes that currency and uses it for cards in that same shop, the shop has exchanged cards for cards and received no benefit (assuming the OP didn't spend more than the credit).
The owner was within his right to throw out someone selling cards in his store when might not offer him any financial benefit to keep his store open.
I'm sure a better owner could have managed the situation better, but he had every right to ban the customer from competing in his store.
But there is no difference between selling for store credit and trading for store credit. It is pretty easy to argue that store credit = cash, since it is still a form of currency and can be used as the equivalency of cash.
The OP said he spent a few hours there and made no purchases there, while trading with the store's customers. These were not the OPs customers, but the stores. Just because you trade in a store, does not guarantee you are helping bring in business. A LGS must strike a balance between allowing an activity that brings in customers, but does not provide too much direct competition. Obviously the store owner felt the balance shifted against his favor too much. The OP was not adding value to the shop, and therefore was asked to leave.
That said, it sounds like the store owner could use a lesson in tact, but most adults I meet certainly could. I'm sure there are plenty of ways the owner could have told the OP he needed to make more purchases or he would lose the ability to trade in his store.