I was playing against a fellow that was using a netdecked doran list. turn four I wrathed off of 2 vivids and two random other lands, and we got into a ten minute argument. gah, MWS is so much fun.
@option3 - the really good MWS logs make fun of player like you who have NOOB as a default token so you can give them to your opponent. You aren't funny, you're just being a jackass.
I think your story already demonstrates how much a tool random people on the Internet can be, so this face punch button would only make things worse.
My MWS wish is that if someone ragequits they can't start/join a new game for 30 minutes. That way, once they started a game they have to see it to the end or go blow off steam elsewhere. I don't think it could be programed the way I would want it to be, but at least it's more realistic than a punch-in-the-face button.
And beside, in "sixth edition" context, you weren't correct or accurate.
I had only a barely passing knowledge of the game until around Planeshift, so I may be a bit hazy about the rules back then, but my statement wasn't that Mana Leak in particular wasn't a whole lot of good against Dark Ritual. Sure there were times in theory when it was better than just Mana Leaking whatever followed with the ritual, Kaervek's Torch was around back then, but on the whole it was a n00b move on my behalf. I only did it because I had more counterspells in my hand than he had cards in his hand. I don't remember if it was pre-6th edition or post-6th edition, just that it was around that general time. The other guy told me that Dark Ritual couldn't be countered, and I believed him, but it wasn't a good play to try to Mana Leak even if it did work, which was my point.
I said it didn't do you a lot of good, not that it was useless. At any rate, Mana Leak is somewhat effective against Tendrils of Agony in the same basic way as Wile E. Coyote's umbrella is slows falling anvils. You loose 2 less life, as it's doubtful they have three mana left after playing their kill card. Unlike the cartoon it is at least possible that 2 life would eventually be enough to live to the next turn.
At any rate, back in 6th edition Tendrils of Agony wasn't a concern, so my statement was accurate in the appropriate context.
On the other hand, you owe it to yourself to learn what can and can't be countered before building a deck with rune snag in it.
One time I tried to Mana Leak a Dark Ritual. It turned out better than expected, as the other guy explained how it couldn't be countered but then ended and took 3 burn (rather than playing something he knew I would mana leak. This was a while ago, and happened in real life as opposed to MWS so I don't have a log for it.
I can still see why someone might not trust that ruling, so maybe in future you should just let Misdirection resolve then play your own. I mean, if it comes out to the same thing. That doesn't excuse the other guy, but I can kind of see getting upset there.
Me plays Ancestral Recall from Hand
Player plays Misdirection from Hand
Player plays Misdirection from Hand [the pitch]
<Me> Thinking
Player puts Misdirection to RFG from Play
Me plays Misdirection from Hand
Me puts Gush to RFG from Hand
Me's life total is now 17 (-1)
<Player> lol
<Player> you
<Player> can't
<Me> misdirect misdirection to misdirection
<Player> lol
<Player> are
<Player> you
<Blastoderm> my misdirection that is
<Player> stupid?
<Player> [censored] idiot
<System> Player Lost
Yeah, I don't lose one life for pitching Misdirection, but I'm still right.
So, your name was Blastoderm? I notice that every time someone changes the names they always leave one line unchanged. Anyway, I'm no guru but I think you can't Misdirection a Misdirection to target either itself or the acting Misdirection. You could let the other one resolve then change the target back.
Maybe trample did work that way back in the day (I wasn't playing then), but by his own admission he was still playing 4-5 years ago. By that point, Urza's Block had been out for 5-6 years, and if the change happened with Urza's Block, then he should have known better.
BTW, do you have any articles or links that talk about the strange ways that rules worked back in the day? I can never find anything that talks about it (like it's a dirty secret that no one will admit to).
Trample used to... well suck. There was a time when a Ball Lightning blocked by Repentant Blacksmith would do no damage to the defending player. There was a time when it did six damage to the defending player. Now it deals 4.
There was a time when a Ball Lightning blocked by Headless Horseman with a Furnace of Rath in play did 20 damage to the defending player. The logic was first you did 12 damage to the horseman, and then you did the leftover (10) to the player, which was doubled by the furnace. Now it is clear that it deals 8 damage (4 leftover, doubled.)
Trample has changed a lot, but that's no excuse for not knowing how it works now. When doubt, pull up the Internet. You're playing MSE, so you know your opponent has Internet access. So in casual games with old timers there's no quicker way to get into a unresolvable argument than trample, but online this shouldn't be a problem.
<Toast>: Hi
<player>: hi
Toast rolled a 12, using a 20 sided die
<player>: rolled a 13, using a 20 sided die
<Toast>: Wait, did you just type that?
<player>: lol noob <System> Player lost
I've had that in reverse. I.e., I roll a 9 with the in-game dice and they say "I rolled a 7." That's not so much cheating as stupidity.
He said it was 6, not that it was "all of the above", so I'm going under the assumption for the moment that it's 6. Regardless of it's CMC though, at some point this sort of argument is going to come up and it'll make a good log is my point.
<Player> Bog Hoodlums
<Kenaron> Wow, I can't believe someone uses that card.
Player reveals Beseech the Queen from library
Kenaron reveals Beseech the Queen from library
Player puts a +1/+1 counter on Bog Hoodlums.
<Kenaron> Uh, WTF?
<Player> I have six, you have 3.
<Kenaron> It's the same card, we tie.
<Player> N00b
System: Player lost.
Despite the fun lesson about split cards, I'm pretty sure that I'm now right about this scenerio I posed earlier. It's official now that Beseech the Queen has CMC 6. I quote from MaRo's new article, Building Blocks, less than an hour old.
Quote from Mark Rosewater »
#2 – The mana symbols on Beseech the Queen are half a and half a . Yes, this is a new twist on hybrid. (And in other ways it isn't at all—but more on that during Beseech the Queen Week.) No, I'm not going to tell you how it works (although common sense should help). How does one figure out the converted mana cost of it and other cards like it (yes, there's more)? Don't worry, it's written on the card. ...Okay, okay, it's six. You can stop the email bombing now.
So maybe my future MWS log will happen as I originally foresaw. I'll have to have 4 X BtQ in every deck and play lots of mirror matches, but when this day comes I'll post about it here.
<Sutherlands> Bog Hoodlums
<Kenaron> Wow, I can't believe someone uses that card.
Sutherlands reveals Research//Development from library
Kenaron reveals Research//Development from library
Sutherlands puts a +1/+1 counter on Bog Hoodlums.
<Kenaron> Uh, WTF?
<Sutherlands> 5 > 2.
<Kenaron> It's the same card, we tie.
<Sutherlands> N00b
System: Player lost.
(In case someone doesn't get it... R//D actually has a "higher" manacost than itself, and thus you would get the counter, as will probably be the same case with Beseech)
I love this for three reasons. First I learned something about split cards that frankly confuses me. Second Sutherlands admits to using Bog Hoodlums to spite me, a hilarious add to a deck using Research//Development. What is this, a three or four color extended deck using Bog Hoodlums? Must get this decklist. Lastly though is that rather than edit the scenario where he explains how he in fact won the clash he calls me a N00b and disconnects. He could have changed the story to make himself look like the good guy but he would rather keep true to my scenario. I think most other people would have switched the names around, or somehow tried to turn it around into an insult. Okay I'm wrong in this little hypothetical, but at least I'm not wrong and a total jerk.
I am curious as to why I can't claim my R/D has CMC 5 in this situation (or frankly claim that they are both seven) but think I see what's going on. Sutherlands here controls the effect that is clashing, so he gets to pick which side of each card is being used. Am I right?
A card can't have multiple powers or toughnesses, so I assume it has only one CMC, either 3 or 6, and time will tell which. I'm hoping for 6, but that's besides the point. Even if it has multiple values, Player is wrong because if he declares his card to be CMC 6 then I can do the same. That is, unless the new symbol has the worst rulings of any new mechanic ever made. Still, we know that something like that will happen eventually no matter what the mechanics say.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Wrath of God? Not Armageddon? I'd like to see the Doran net-deck that uses Nature's Revolt.
I think your story already demonstrates how much a tool random people on the Internet can be, so this face punch button would only make things worse.
My MWS wish is that if someone ragequits they can't start/join a new game for 30 minutes. That way, once they started a game they have to see it to the end or go blow off steam elsewhere. I don't think it could be programed the way I would want it to be, but at least it's more realistic than a punch-in-the-face button.
I had only a barely passing knowledge of the game until around Planeshift, so I may be a bit hazy about the rules back then, but my statement wasn't that Mana Leak in particular wasn't a whole lot of good against Dark Ritual. Sure there were times in theory when it was better than just Mana Leaking whatever followed with the ritual, Kaervek's Torch was around back then, but on the whole it was a n00b move on my behalf. I only did it because I had more counterspells in my hand than he had cards in his hand. I don't remember if it was pre-6th edition or post-6th edition, just that it was around that general time. The other guy told me that Dark Ritual couldn't be countered, and I believed him, but it wasn't a good play to try to Mana Leak even if it did work, which was my point.
I said it didn't do you a lot of good, not that it was useless. At any rate, Mana Leak is somewhat effective against Tendrils of Agony in the same basic way as Wile E. Coyote's umbrella is slows falling anvils. You loose 2 less life, as it's doubtful they have three mana left after playing their kill card. Unlike the cartoon it is at least possible that 2 life would eventually be enough to live to the next turn.
At any rate, back in 6th edition Tendrils of Agony wasn't a concern, so my statement was accurate in the appropriate context.
I think this was around 6th edition. Even if I'm wrong, it doesn't do you a lot of good to be able to mana leak a dark ritual.
One time I tried to Mana Leak a Dark Ritual. It turned out better than expected, as the other guy explained how it couldn't be countered but then ended and took 3 burn (rather than playing something he knew I would mana leak. This was a while ago, and happened in real life as opposed to MWS so I don't have a log for it.
So, your name was Blastoderm? I notice that every time someone changes the names they always leave one line unchanged. Anyway, I'm no guru but I think you can't Misdirection a Misdirection to target either itself or the acting Misdirection. You could let the other one resolve then change the target back.
Trample used to... well suck. There was a time when a Ball Lightning blocked by Repentant Blacksmith would do no damage to the defending player. There was a time when it did six damage to the defending player. Now it deals 4.
There was a time when a Ball Lightning blocked by Headless Horseman with a Furnace of Rath in play did 20 damage to the defending player. The logic was first you did 12 damage to the horseman, and then you did the leftover (10) to the player, which was doubled by the furnace. Now it is clear that it deals 8 damage (4 leftover, doubled.)
Trample has changed a lot, but that's no excuse for not knowing how it works now. When doubt, pull up the Internet. You're playing MSE, so you know your opponent has Internet access. So in casual games with old timers there's no quicker way to get into a unresolvable argument than trample, but online this shouldn't be a problem.
I've had that in reverse. I.e., I roll a 9 with the in-game dice and they say "I rolled a 7." That's not so much cheating as stupidity.
Despite the fun lesson about split cards, I'm pretty sure that I'm now right about this scenerio I posed earlier. It's official now that Beseech the Queen has CMC 6. I quote from MaRo's new article, Building Blocks, less than an hour old.
So maybe my future MWS log will happen as I originally foresaw. I'll have to have 4 X BtQ in every deck and play lots of mirror matches, but when this day comes I'll post about it here.
I love this for three reasons. First I learned something about split cards that frankly confuses me. Second Sutherlands admits to using Bog Hoodlums to spite me, a hilarious add to a deck using Research//Development. What is this, a three or four color extended deck using Bog Hoodlums? Must get this decklist. Lastly though is that rather than edit the scenario where he explains how he in fact won the clash he calls me a N00b and disconnects. He could have changed the story to make himself look like the good guy but he would rather keep true to my scenario. I think most other people would have switched the names around, or somehow tried to turn it around into an insult. Okay I'm wrong in this little hypothetical, but at least I'm not wrong and a total jerk.
I am curious as to why I can't claim my R/D has CMC 5 in this situation (or frankly claim that they are both seven) but think I see what's going on. Sutherlands here controls the effect that is clashing, so he gets to pick which side of each card is being used. Am I right?