These are terms I coined to describe my method of systematic mathematical proportion in tcg deck structure. And now we are getting too off topic.
That you coind them checks out since this is not the first time you use words despite those words meaning different things.
Systematic there seems to be hardly any system to it as the math you showed doesn't do anything Probability related or even proportion related and the other one you won't explain.
I'm just going to describe that you are finding the average and that's not within the method of systematic mathematical proportion that I use, and have proven immensely accurate and successful.
So you are saying Proven mathematical concepts (that don't calculate averages, like at all) work worse at calculating the same thing as your Unexplained, unproven method. If you can't explain it with math that is actually proven to do the things it set's out to do it can never be more accurate (or accurate at all).
Additionally, I would suggest you don't test any of my decks online, but try them on tabletop. The online venue had corruption issues that I wasn't able to resolve despite vehement and persistent efforts. But apparently, corruptee fed kiddies were/are pirating card codes and set up a racket there, so it doesn't surprise me at all.
To test that out your "method of systematic mathematical proportion" One would not need to use PKMN or MTG cards so that online thing and the "corruption" thing doesn't matter since mathematically it doesn't matter if it's TCGs or uno cards .But since you added that in it just sounds like the old "the Shuffler is broken in this game , in paper this never happens" which in most cases is just plain wrong and delusional if not outright admittance that you don't shuffle properly.
Also, noted on the face-down suggestion, but it is better fixed by the amendment of the rules defining that exiled cards can't be exiled again unless they are changing face (face up to face down and vice versa).
There it is. "I don't know how the rules work so they should be changed to reflect my ignorance."
You've learned nothing. To repeat another poster, what do you gain by posting here? Because the more cards you make the clearer it is to me that you're just a troll making terrible cards that flaunt the rules just to rile people up.
The notion is that you can apply the Deus Ex Machinia effect after the effect of the spell itself.
Also, noted on the face-down suggestion, but it is better fixed by the amendment of the rules defining that exiled cards can't be exiled again unless they are changing face (face up to face down and vice versa).
Why don't you just design the card in a way so that you don't need a rule to tell you that you can't do a thing that the card says it can do? You decided to put "Any revealed zone" on the card. The card has rules text that explain what the card does. Your idea to then add additional card text to the MTG rulebook is a much worse way of making your card work, because if you do that, the text on your card is still lying about what the card does.
Your idea to then add additional card text to the MTG rulebook is a much worse way of making your card work, because if you do that, the text on your card is still lying about what the card does.
It's not lying about what it does if you can't exile an exiled card again unless it's changing face.
Psychometry (As you cast this spell or when it leaves the stack, you may shuffle up to three cards from your hand into your library, then draw that many cards.)
The timing difference between the casting of a spell and that spell leaving the stack is miniscule enough that I would suggest not bothering with giving players that choice to begin with.
The notion is that you can apply the Deus Ex Machinia effect after the effect of the spell itself.
Also, noted on the face-down suggestion, but it is better fixed by the amendment of the rules defining that exiled cards can't be exiled again unless they are changing face (face up to face down and vice versa).
He still doesn't understand that this wording, because it is a triggered ability with an "or" in the condition (see Primeval Titan), gives the player the option to do the card filtering both when casting AND when the spell leaves the stack from resolving or being countered.
He still doesn't understand that this wording, because it is a triggered ability with an "or" in the condition (see Primeval Titan), gives the player the option to do the card filtering both when casting AND when the spell leaves the stack from resolving or being countered.
It really doesn't. And this has already been discussed and explained in detail.
You have to choose one or the other. This is as old as the game itself. Disenchant
The fact that the titan does that (or is able to it by the context) is because it's switching zone and functions.
Your idea to then add additional card text to the MTG rulebook is a much worse way of making your card work, because if you do that, the text on your card is still lying about what the card does.
It's not lying about what it does if you can't exile an exiled card again unless it's changing face.
But you don't know about that rule unless you've gone through the Magic Lawbook and passed the Magic Bar Exam, and even then you might not know because it's a brand new rule created for just this card instead of the card just saying what it does.
3, Exile Ancestral Testament from the battlefield or your graveyard: Draw three cards.
It's pointless to include the exile zone because you don't want to use the exile zone. The cases where the card would end up in the Command Zone are very slim. So just say Battlefield + Graveyard.
You are demonstrably wrong, because apparently you don't understand the difference between choosing targets and defining conditions for triggered abilities.
And, lest we forget, I'm a certified judge. I know the rules well enough to have passed the test on them and to enforce them at tournaments.
It really doesn't. And this has already been discussed and explained in detail.
Apparently it hasn't since everyone here knows how it works and tells you but you just don't accept it. The reason Prime time works multiple times and disenchant doesn't is since it has 2 triggering situations just like Elder Gargaroth triggers both on attacking and blocking. Disenchant doesn't have a Trigger the or here references the choosing of targets.
Still waiting on an explanation on your math as well but it looks like just like you try to work the rules to work for your card instead of the other way around you do the same for math. With card game rules it's just bad design with the math it is factually wrong. Seems to be your modus operandi is use big words to sound smart an when somebody points to a flaw either say its not your fault its the fault of the ruleset, avoid talking about it or more big hollow words where you either don't know the meaning of or go back into "The ruleset of english is at fault" mode (Since you mean sth different with an established word and its not your fault that not everyone else uses it correctly)
Those both give you a choice between two options during the spell's resolution. They are offering you the opportunity to choose one or the other so no, it absolutely does not allow you to choose both and no one in this thread is saying they do.
The problem with your "Deus Ex Machina" ability is that neither thing happens during the spell's resolution. The effects happen at times that have nothing to do with the spell resolving so does not fall into the same situation. As mentioned, it is more akin to things like the Titans that allow an effect at different times or something like Gargaroth that does the same. That is, it can trigger when the card enters or when it attacks (for the titans; two different conditions) or when it attacks or blocks (for the Gargaroth; again two different conditions).
Yours is obviously analogous to these cards and not anywhere close to the way Twiddle is worded or how it works. Your Machina ability works even if the spell is countered to it obviously isn't an effect or choice made during resolution. And as people have already mentioned, since it is two completely separate conditions the effect will happen in both. It is not a choice of which to apply the ability in just like the Titans and Gargaroth don't offer a choice of whether to trigger. They happen regardless (with some other choices being made as part of those triggers). Your ability is the same. It is, frankly, insane that you are trying to design cards for a game with such specific wordings and templating and then getting mad when the current ruleset doesn't support your cards as you have written them.
If you don't want to design Magic cards, then don't. Go somewhere else where your designs can be part of a brand new game. If you find the right audience, there could even be constructive feedback in the context of that game. But don't bring non-Magic designs into a Magic Custom Card forum and then start claiming that it is the *Magic* rules that are wrong. You aren't designing Magic cards so there is literally no reason the rules should be adjusted (and no reason the rest of us should assume the rules would be adjusted) to make your monstrosities of card design and templating actually work when it would require a significant overhaul to the rules which, in turn, breaks actual Magic cards.
And how do you reconcile that with how Gargaroth functions? That has no zone change associated with its "or" functionality?
Also, your wording introduces *two* zone changes.... I don't know why you think not changing zones matters but even if it did, your spell changes zones twice. First from hand (presumably) to the stack and the second is a change from the stack to (presumably) the graveyard (or battlefield). Even if your argument was that the reason the Titans work the way they do is because one condition is accompanied with a zone change, you have only further bolstered the arguments that your card triggers twice as well because you have 2 zone changes thus there are two reasons this matches the Titan's "or" functionality and even takes it further.
And how do you reconcile that with how Gargaroth functions? That has no zone change associated with its "or" functionality?
There is a change in functionality between attacking and blocking. Additionally, they happen at entirely different times.
Yes, exactly!
You seem to agree that “enters the battlefield or leaves the battlefield” like Aven Riftwatcher is at entirely different times and that there is no “choice” being made.
Entering the stack and leaving the stack are also totally different times. This is the point we are trying to make. This right here.
And how do you reconcile that with how Gargaroth functions? That has no zone change associated with its "or" functionality?
There is a change in functionality between attacking and blocking. Additionally, they happen at entirely different times.
Yes, exactly!
You seem to agree that “enters the battlefield or leaves the battlefield” like Aven Riftwatcher is at entirely different times and that there is no “choice” being made.
Entering the stack and leaving the stack are also totally different times. This is the point we are trying to make. This right here.
You might think you've found a technicality, but they are also different functions, well understood and defined.
This currently, as explained once before before, would simply be explained to function as intended for coherence.
And how do you reconcile that with how Gargaroth functions? That has no zone change associated with its "or" functionality?
There is a change in functionality between attacking and blocking. Additionally, they happen at entirely different times.
Yes, exactly!
You seem to agree that “enters the battlefield or leaves the battlefield” like Aven Riftwatcher is at entirely different times and that there is no “choice” being made.
Entering the stack and leaving the stack are also totally different times. This is the point we are trying to make. This right here.
You might think you've found a technicality, but they are also different functions, well understood and defined.
This currently, as explained once before before, would simply be explained to function as intended for coherence.
If you have to add specialized text to "explain" in your hypothetical future, I think we pretty conclusively proved that the "modular or" is not used, according to current MTG rules (AKA before you make any changes), to choosing when an effect trigger. You know, seeing how current magic is 100% ruled by technicalities because we want Comprehensive Rules that cover all cards rather than cards that carve out the comprehensive rules.
I do find your threads fascinating. I mean, basically every single one of them reads as though you are simply a troll. Hardly anything you ever say makes sense, and the way you present your designs and thoughts are so ridiculously convoluted that there is basically no way anyone could ever engage with the community with this much ignorance coupled with the amount of confidence you exude in perpetuating and displaying your ignorance to be anything other than a troll with a carefully thought out "plan of attack".
And yet, you are so convincing in your online persona of just being this absolutely terrible Magic designer with absolutely no weakness to, or desire for, suggestions that it really is tough to just cast you aside as a simple troll. You have done extraordinarily well as presenting yourself as this dunce, this unintelligent, overconfident poster, that it is almost impossible to just walk away.
In fact, while I rarely look forward to your responses in your threads since they are drivel, I do find "contributing" to your designs, and arguing with you, to be a form of catharsis. Your designs can only be met with ridicule but you have such thick skin that the ridicule is like water on a duck's back: you are completely unfazed by it. And being able to go over why your cards won't work is honestly quite enjoyable. It is like a persistent puzzle. "What has Reap done today and what about this design doesn't work?" It is why your design for Realm of the Ancients has basically been ignored. It is so banal, so unremarkable, as to be inconsequential to the discussion because it does work. It is like a Zelda puzzle where the solution is "walk through the door". It is boring and uninteresting. Your designs spark these long threads because you insist on designing things that absolutely do not work and thus it becomes a challenge for the rest of us to determine exactly what doesn't work and, I admit, try to convince of that fact.
It is also why your Deus Ex Machina is particularly frustrating. We already know why it doesn't work. You already know why it doesn't work. It isn't a challenge to explain or discuss anymore so your threads with it feel derivative. In fact, contrary to what you believe, the designs with Deus Ex Machina have also become banal and uninteresting because there isn't anything new. Granted, this latest discussion offered a few more points against your interpretation so it was still entertaining to discuss; but the ability itself is now overdone.
Going to regret this but is your argument that entering and leaving the stack are not different functions well understood and defined? Because it seems obvious to me that they are. Casting a spell and starting a stack is very differnt from resolving a stack. I think the clearest example is something like Emrakul, the aeons torn. It has a cast trigger which is the same as your mechanic just in this case it's take an extra turn rather that the triple filter. But it also functionally has a leave the stack effect (becoming a creature in play).
It's clear that your design didn't want that to be the case and if WotC wanted to print a card where it was the case they would use the "and or" wording but I don't think it's necessary just what their current style guide would choose. Just clearer. But you're not WotC and you don't get to change the rulebook. I mean you can for your custom cards but if you're going to it should be for a purpose like creating a new zone for partners or something that adds to the game, otherwise it just ends to talking in circles and difficulty in communication.
FYI here is a ruling on the exile zone that implicitly states it is possible to exile an exiled card:
406.7. If an object in the exile zone becomes exiled, it doesn’t change zones, but it becomes a new object that has just been exiled.
Unfortunately by the rules so are entering and leaving the stack. I know you don't want it to work that way and for your custom set you can create a rule that makes it so it isn't but the RAW say this would trigger twice.
So your choices are either change your wording, propose a rules change and include it in your posts so we understand it only triggers once, or continue down the path of miscommunication we're on now.
Also out of curiosity how powerful do you intend this ability to be? To me it seems like a 9.5 to 10 out of 10 even if it only triggers once. Curious how you are budgeting it's power in your designs. To me the effect is worth about 2.5 mana factoring in the uncountable aspect of it so the card it's attached to doesn't have to do much for it to be worth it just for the deus ex.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
That you coind them checks out since this is not the first time you use words despite those words meaning different things.
Systematic there seems to be hardly any system to it as the math you showed doesn't do anything Probability related or even proportion related and the other one you won't explain.
So you are saying Proven mathematical concepts (that don't calculate averages, like at all) work worse at calculating the same thing as your Unexplained, unproven method. If you can't explain it with math that is actually proven to do the things it set's out to do it can never be more accurate (or accurate at all).
To test that out your "method of systematic mathematical proportion" One would not need to use PKMN or MTG cards so that online thing and the "corruption" thing doesn't matter since mathematically it doesn't matter if it's TCGs or uno cards .But since you added that in it just sounds like the old "the Shuffler is broken in this game , in paper this never happens" which in most cases is just plain wrong and delusional if not outright admittance that you don't shuffle properly.
There it is. "I don't know how the rules work so they should be changed to reflect my ignorance."
You've learned nothing. To repeat another poster, what do you gain by posting here? Because the more cards you make the clearer it is to me that you're just a troll making terrible cards that flaunt the rules just to rile people up.
Why don't you just design the card in a way so that you don't need a rule to tell you that you can't do a thing that the card says it can do? You decided to put "Any revealed zone" on the card. The card has rules text that explain what the card does. Your idea to then add additional card text to the MTG rulebook is a much worse way of making your card work, because if you do that, the text on your card is still lying about what the card does.
It's not lying about what it does if you can't exile an exiled card again unless it's changing face.
He still doesn't understand that this wording, because it is a triggered ability with an "or" in the condition (see Primeval Titan), gives the player the option to do the card filtering both when casting AND when the spell leaves the stack from resolving or being countered.
It really doesn't. And this has already been discussed and explained in detail.
You have to choose one or the other. This is as old as the game itself. Disenchant
The fact that the titan does that (or is able to it by the context) is because it's switching zone and functions.
But you don't know about that rule unless you've gone through the Magic Lawbook and passed the Magic Bar Exam, and even then you might not know because it's a brand new rule created for just this card instead of the card just saying what it does.
3, Exile Ancestral Testament from the battlefield or your graveyard: Draw three cards.
It's pointless to include the exile zone because you don't want to use the exile zone. The cases where the card would end up in the Command Zone are very slim. So just say Battlefield + Graveyard.
...What? The titan "switching zones" has nothing to do with it. Would you like more examples of triggered abilities that use or and activate under both conditions, not choosing only one or the other? Will you look at that, I found 7 examples that prove you're wrong and I only got halfway through the letter A.
You are demonstrably wrong, because apparently you don't understand the difference between choosing targets and defining conditions for triggered abilities.
And, lest we forget, I'm a certified judge. I know the rules well enough to have passed the test on them and to enforce them at tournaments.
You're wrong.
Apparently it hasn't since everyone here knows how it works and tells you but you just don't accept it. The reason Prime time works multiple times and disenchant doesn't is since it has 2 triggering situations just like Elder Gargaroth triggers both on attacking and blocking. Disenchant doesn't have a Trigger the or here references the choosing of targets.
Still waiting on an explanation on your math as well but it looks like just like you try to work the rules to work for your card instead of the other way around you do the same for math. With card game rules it's just bad design with the math it is factually wrong. Seems to be your modus operandi is use big words to sound smart an when somebody points to a flaw either say its not your fault its the fault of the ruleset, avoid talking about it or more big hollow words where you either don't know the meaning of or go back into "The ruleset of english is at fault" mode (Since you mean sth different with an established word and its not your fault that not everyone else uses it correctly)
Thoughtlace
Twiddle
Is it one or the other—or is it both if you want?
The problem with your "Deus Ex Machina" ability is that neither thing happens during the spell's resolution. The effects happen at times that have nothing to do with the spell resolving so does not fall into the same situation. As mentioned, it is more akin to things like the Titans that allow an effect at different times or something like Gargaroth that does the same. That is, it can trigger when the card enters or when it attacks (for the titans; two different conditions) or when it attacks or blocks (for the Gargaroth; again two different conditions).
Yours is obviously analogous to these cards and not anywhere close to the way Twiddle is worded or how it works. Your Machina ability works even if the spell is countered to it obviously isn't an effect or choice made during resolution. And as people have already mentioned, since it is two completely separate conditions the effect will happen in both. It is not a choice of which to apply the ability in just like the Titans and Gargaroth don't offer a choice of whether to trigger. They happen regardless (with some other choices being made as part of those triggers). Your ability is the same. It is, frankly, insane that you are trying to design cards for a game with such specific wordings and templating and then getting mad when the current ruleset doesn't support your cards as you have written them.
If you don't want to design Magic cards, then don't. Go somewhere else where your designs can be part of a brand new game. If you find the right audience, there could even be constructive feedback in the context of that game. But don't bring non-Magic designs into a Magic Custom Card forum and then start claiming that it is the *Magic* rules that are wrong. You aren't designing Magic cards so there is literally no reason the rules should be adjusted (and no reason the rest of us should assume the rules would be adjusted) to make your monstrosities of card design and templating actually work when it would require a significant overhaul to the rules which, in turn, breaks actual Magic cards.
When this spell goes on the stack or leaves the stack,
Here you can see clearly there is no change in zoning or function.
The context directs [one or the other—at the start of resolution or at the finish].
Also, your wording introduces *two* zone changes.... I don't know why you think not changing zones matters but even if it did, your spell changes zones twice. First from hand (presumably) to the stack and the second is a change from the stack to (presumably) the graveyard (or battlefield). Even if your argument was that the reason the Titans work the way they do is because one condition is accompanied with a zone change, you have only further bolstered the arguments that your card triggers twice as well because you have 2 zone changes thus there are two reasons this matches the Titan's "or" functionality and even takes it further.
There is a change in functionality between attacking and blocking. Additionally, they happen at entirely different times.
Yes, exactly!
You seem to agree that “enters the battlefield or leaves the battlefield” like Aven Riftwatcher is at entirely different times and that there is no “choice” being made.
Entering the stack and leaving the stack are also totally different times. This is the point we are trying to make. This right here.
You might think you've found a technicality, but they are also different functions, well understood and defined.
This currently, as explained once before before, would simply be explained to function as intended for coherence.
If you have to add specialized text to "explain" in your hypothetical future, I think we pretty conclusively proved that the "modular or" is not used, according to current MTG rules (AKA before you make any changes), to choosing when an effect trigger. You know, seeing how current magic is 100% ruled by technicalities because we want Comprehensive Rules that cover all cards rather than cards that carve out the comprehensive rules.
And yet, you are so convincing in your online persona of just being this absolutely terrible Magic designer with absolutely no weakness to, or desire for, suggestions that it really is tough to just cast you aside as a simple troll. You have done extraordinarily well as presenting yourself as this dunce, this unintelligent, overconfident poster, that it is almost impossible to just walk away.
In fact, while I rarely look forward to your responses in your threads since they are drivel, I do find "contributing" to your designs, and arguing with you, to be a form of catharsis. Your designs can only be met with ridicule but you have such thick skin that the ridicule is like water on a duck's back: you are completely unfazed by it. And being able to go over why your cards won't work is honestly quite enjoyable. It is like a persistent puzzle. "What has Reap done today and what about this design doesn't work?" It is why your design for Realm of the Ancients has basically been ignored. It is so banal, so unremarkable, as to be inconsequential to the discussion because it does work. It is like a Zelda puzzle where the solution is "walk through the door". It is boring and uninteresting. Your designs spark these long threads because you insist on designing things that absolutely do not work and thus it becomes a challenge for the rest of us to determine exactly what doesn't work and, I admit, try to convince of that fact.
It is also why your Deus Ex Machina is particularly frustrating. We already know why it doesn't work. You already know why it doesn't work. It isn't a challenge to explain or discuss anymore so your threads with it feel derivative. In fact, contrary to what you believe, the designs with Deus Ex Machina have also become banal and uninteresting because there isn't anything new. Granted, this latest discussion offered a few more points against your interpretation so it was still entertaining to discuss; but the ability itself is now overdone.
It's clear that your design didn't want that to be the case and if WotC wanted to print a card where it was the case they would use the "and or" wording but I don't think it's necessary just what their current style guide would choose. Just clearer. But you're not WotC and you don't get to change the rulebook. I mean you can for your custom cards but if you're going to it should be for a purpose like creating a new zone for partners or something that adds to the game, otherwise it just ends to talking in circles and difficulty in communication.
FYI here is a ruling on the exile zone that implicitly states it is possible to exile an exiled card:
406.7. If an object in the exile zone becomes exiled, it doesn’t change zones, but it becomes a new object that has just been exiled.
It all happens in the same sequence. During this sequence, you have a choice of at the start or the end.
This is different from entering the battlefield and leaving the battlefield, in that there is a definite silent pause involved.
They are strongly two different sequences.
So your choices are either change your wording, propose a rules change and include it in your posts so we understand it only triggers once, or continue down the path of miscommunication we're on now.
Also out of curiosity how powerful do you intend this ability to be? To me it seems like a 9.5 to 10 out of 10 even if it only triggers once. Curious how you are budgeting it's power in your designs. To me the effect is worth about 2.5 mana factoring in the uncountable aspect of it so the card it's attached to doesn't have to do much for it to be worth it just for the deus ex.