And there are Modern legal cards that have been printed with and without Modern borders. And there are Pauper legal cards that have been printed as Uncommons and Commons. And players know them all. It's really not that confusing.
And I didn't realize it was permitted to criticize cards before voting befor the day was over. Apparently, it's merely bad forum.
My... apologies? If you consider it bad form, I truly am sorry, but I've always thought of that as the more appropriate thing to do when it came to a concern of function. I'd certainly rather not waste a day because something got muddled.
The reason why it seemed a tad off to me is because, as you've stated, those cards are legal in that they've been reprinted and thus have that sole reason to be usable. Something like a watermark, which would not limit or deny its place in a deck, on the other hand is a tad different.
Golden Gate (Rare)
Land - Gate
Golden Gate enters the battlefield tapped. T: Add one mana of any color to your mana pool. Spend this mana only to pay for casting costs and ability costs of cards with a watermark.
Eh? Watermarks? As in the faded symbol of a guild or the Scars factions? That sounds cute, but it seems a bit murked up considering there are cards, such as Ratchet Bomb, that have been printed with and without watermarks.
I guess the ideal would've been "Your opponents and creatures your opponents control with hexproof or shroud can be the targets of spells and abilities you control as though they didn't have hexproof or shroud."
Something along those lines? Would it be "or" or "and?"
It reminded me a bit of Sneak Attack, honestly, it's just the matter of it tutoring for whatever creature being the problem and reason why I didn't vote for it. There's a decent amount of creatures out there that make hefty footprints upon entry, even in our current Standard, things like a three mana Tusk are pretty game shifting.
As for me, I think I tend to string more towards Standard usage, but I also like to look to things a few sets back for some breath—even though that sometimes just means trying to rework something for Type 2 play.
Gatherer says 213 cards have that text now (not all printed, of course). It's part of the reminder text for both fear and intimidate. Also, any kicker card with more than one cost uses it. There are a few other cards that do, too (Fireball's the big one).
Wow. I don't know why none of that came to me, and I apparently screwed up the search. I guess it's because it was mainly reminder text... and Fireball.
What I really love about hydras is how there's been a show of some unique, not straight-up hydra creatures in Magic's history. Really lets you play with their theme, and mix different archetypical aspects into one.
Creature - Fungus Hydra
Thallid Hydra enters the battlefield with three +1/+1 counters on it.
At the beginning of your upkeep, put a spore counter and a +1/+1 counter on Thallid Hydra.
Remove a combination of four spore and/or +1/+1 counters from Thalid Hydra: Put two 1/1 green Saproling creature tokens onto the battlefield.
Come to think of it, I don't think I've ever seen an actual printed card use the term "and/or."
Dude I thought it was a mountain! I totally would not have voted for it if I had read it properly. I feel you buddy. Sorry for letting you down. I kinda think understanding the voting or the proclivities of the proletariat are really beyond me.
1: Street Riot deals 1 damage to target opponent.
1: Prevent the next 1 damage Street Riot would deal this turn. Only any opponent may activate this ability. Ain't no party like a Rakdos party.
Seems rather flavorful, but perhaps a bit oversold at cc7. Actually kind of has that silly big red rare quality that Wizards likes to pull though.
People have pointed this out but meh, there are no wedge lands that are strictly better and to be honest I can't believe I deserve singling out for this. Are you honestly saying this is the worst card with multiple votes you've seen in DCC recently. How could I not take offence to that?
My apologies, Antny, it's just something that struck me from my previous experiences with the DCC. It was by no means the worst card to get votes I've seen in awhile, just one that didn't make much sense to me at all. I know for a fact I've also posted cards that made frail sense but through the grace of voter interpretation has gotten multiple points—I'm sure we all have—but that shouldn't rid us critique.
I'm honestly kind of sad that helping hands aren't given out too often in the chat anymore. We used to help one another with simple things like grammar or spelling, or clarifying the interaction and wording a card should have, but... it doesn't seem like that happens anymore.
Of course I singled you out, but it was only this one card in particular. I didn't want to offend you, but I wanted to bring my thoughts forward because I thought it seemed peculiar. It's also pretty obvious that my way of addressing the problem wasn't well articulated, but I guess I can only hope that's simply from the rust of the now foresaken mutual critiques.
I am sorry for the way I handled it, but I'm not for my thoughts on Numot's Summit.