My words don't seem as angry when unbolded and read in the context of the quotes to which they are replying. To assist you in re-reading, I have bolded the salient portion of the quote to which I replied.
And yeah, I guess people do want to ban Ghostly Flicker in Pauper Classic. Crazy. I thought he was referencing the thread over at the quasi-official PDC forums to ban it in Standard Pauper.
My bad, Asabmow. We actually agree that Ghostly Flicker shouldn't be banned, and I concede that people have suggested banning it in Classic Pauper.
To summarize my position, ban Cloudpost and probably the artifact lands (but that's whole 'nother mess of fish). Worry about spells once the lands are fair.
I'm a veteran pauper player, and I understand why people get upset about cloudpost/glimmerpost and now ghostly flicker, but as I have before whenever this idea of banning cloudpost/glimmerpost/ghostly flicker comes up, I have to explain exactly why it is not the problem you think it is.
...
Now people will still complain about playing against cloudpost, but this complaint is based in the fact that people just don't like playing against slow grindy control decks period, but, hey this is part of magic.
...
Furthermore, when you eliminate temporal fissure, all the sudden ghostly flicker is no longer a problem card.
*********************************************
Somehow you neglected to mention that the people talking about banning Ghostly Flicker are talking about banning it in Standard Pauper, while the people talking about banning Cloudpost are talking about banning it in Classic Pauper. That renders the blue portion of your quoted comment irrelevant. (EDIT: I am wrong. My apologies.)
For the record, you don't seem to understand what's upsetting about Cloudpost. I savor the challenge of playing against it, and I love playing grindy control decks. I mind that it restricts my options when building those very same grindy control decks. Why would you build a control deck without lands that make more than one mana if you have the option?
It comes off as very condescending when you say, in essence, "The people who disagree with me do so not because of a legitimate disagreement, but rather because their understanding of the game is less refined than my own."
Although Fissure is a house, it is the sole remaining storm card that can be the basis for a deck in pauper. I mean, it's not like you can go lethal with a storm count of 20 and Sprouting Vines.
Before entirely cutting storm out of pauper, I would like to see how Fissure plays when it's not backed by a land base that's better than anything else Pauper has to offer.
Finally, without Locus lands, Cloud of Faeries only breaks even on mana. Cloudpost makes Cloud of Faeries broken, not the other way around. A free 1/1 is good, but 4+ free mana is better.
Somehow you neglected to mention that the people talking about banning Ghostly Flicker are talking about banning it in Standard Pauper, while the people talking about banning Cloudpost are talking about banning it in Classic Pauper.
For the record, you don't seem to understand what's upsetting about Cloudpost. I savor the challenge of playing against it, and I love playing grindy control decks. I mind that it restricts my options when building those very same grindy control decks. Why would you build a control deck without lands that make more than one mana if you have the option?
It comes off as very condescending when you say, in essence, "The people who disagree with me do so not because of a legitimate disagreement, but rather because their understanding of the game is less refined than my own."
Although Fissure is a house, it is the sole remaining storm card that can be the basis for a deck in pauper. I mean, it's not like you can go lethal with a storm count of 20 and Sprouting Vines.
Before entirely cutting storm out of pauper, I would like to see how Fissure plays when it's not backed by a land base that's better than anything else Pauper has to offer.
A) Ben Bleiweiss is talking far, far, out of his ass; or
B) Wizards is leaking info to him and screwing with the secondary market in an unprecedented manner.
Whichever one it is, to create a situation that depicts you as being either A or B for the sake of making money off "premium content" that people have already paid for when you are already the 5000 lb. gorilla of the secondary market of the world's most successful collectible card game and your prices are acknowledged as being higher than everyone else's...
It's worse than a millionaire stooping to pick up a penny. It's like Croesus digging a hole to China to snag an atom of copper.
1. Very few cards only shrink toughness. It's way more elegant to shrink both power and toughness.
2. Incinerate is better than Lightning Bolt in every way.
3. Executioner's Swing isn't printed for standard.
The only thing we're in need of is for constructed formats to stop existing so people stop playing bad formats.
1. It's not elegant at all to make shrinking power dependent on the creature dealing damage.
2. Incinerate is not better than Lightning Bolt in every way (I can't believe you wrote that), and the opposite is also false. Why did you even go there when the obvious comparison is Lightning Bolt / Searing Spear?
3. It is legal in Standard, therefore it was printed for Standard.
The only thing we're in need of is for Wizards to acknowledge the cards they print should be useful for more than an hour after you open them.
It's pretty clear that Locus lands are head and shoulders the best nonbasics in Pauper since Glimmerpost entered the cardpool. What's the runner up, Quicksand?
I would like to see Cloudpost banned just because every control shell I start to build in pauper starts out great and then I realize it would be better with four Cloudpost and four Glimmerpost and then screw it, why not just netdeck instead of playing a bad version of 8post.
Lands that tap for more than one mana (and Cloudposts tap for a good deal more than that with regularity) are quite good. Cloudpost is banned in Modern for a reason.
Is flavor really that important to constantly have? In a game where you can have a small bird like Birds of Paradise wield a massive weapon like Loxodon Warhammer with no problems?
Actually, I took the trouble of deciphering that wall of text. It is paramount that he learns to say something worth understanding before he learns to paragraph.
This and uber cipher-enabler Invisible Stalker combine to permanently Phantasmal Terrain an opposing basic land, or turn a shock land into a basic. (Godless Shrine becomes "Land - Swamp Swamp", for example.)
Note that mana of a color the opponent can't use may as well be colorless. The above strategy leads to a soft lock, yes?
Thus far, I've only mentioned on the minimum usage of the Magical Hack side of the card. Your opponent is practically guaranteed to have some basics out, and probably some shocklands, too.
The Sleight of Mind side makes protection irrelevant (other than blue, due to targeting restrictions... I think Skylasher might have been made with this in mind...), or make your own protection more relevant.
In limited, it can turn off opposing Denizens by making them trigger on a color the opponent isn't playing. I'm sure in R2R limited there are a ton of such tricks. I don't play limited, just saying for those who do.
Admittedly, Magical Hack and Sleight of Mind can target spells as well as permanents, but Trait Doctoring compares favorably in many ways to its more direct precedent, Whim of Volrath, which shares its targeting restriction.
Admittedly, Mono-green decks skew the forest count.
My words don't seem as angry when unbolded and read in the context of the quotes to which they are replying. To assist you in re-reading, I have bolded the salient portion of the quote to which I replied.
And yeah, I guess people do want to ban Ghostly Flicker in Pauper Classic. Crazy. I thought he was referencing the thread over at the quasi-official PDC forums to ban it in Standard Pauper.
My bad, Asabmow. We actually agree that Ghostly Flicker shouldn't be banned, and I concede that people have suggested banning it in Classic Pauper.
To summarize my position, ban Cloudpost and probably the artifact lands (but that's whole 'nother mess of fish). Worry about spells once the lands are fair.
*********************************************
Somehow you neglected to mention that the people talking about banning Ghostly Flicker are talking about banning it in Standard Pauper, while the people talking about banning Cloudpost are talking about banning it in Classic Pauper. That renders the blue portion of your quoted comment irrelevant. (EDIT: I am wrong. My apologies.)
For the record, you don't seem to understand what's upsetting about Cloudpost. I savor the challenge of playing against it, and I love playing grindy control decks. I mind that it restricts my options when building those very same grindy control decks. Why would you build a control deck without lands that make more than one mana if you have the option?
It comes off as very condescending when you say, in essence, "The people who disagree with me do so not because of a legitimate disagreement, but rather because their understanding of the game is less refined than my own."
Although Fissure is a house, it is the sole remaining storm card that can be the basis for a deck in pauper. I mean, it's not like you can go lethal with a storm count of 20 and Sprouting Vines.
Before entirely cutting storm out of pauper, I would like to see how Fissure plays when it's not backed by a land base that's better than anything else Pauper has to offer.
Finally, without Locus lands, Cloud of Faeries only breaks even on mana. Cloudpost makes Cloud of Faeries broken, not the other way around. A free 1/1 is good, but 4+ free mana is better.
For the record, you don't seem to understand what's upsetting about Cloudpost. I savor the challenge of playing against it, and I love playing grindy control decks. I mind that it restricts my options when building those very same grindy control decks. Why would you build a control deck without lands that make more than one mana if you have the option?
It comes off as very condescending when you say, in essence, "The people who disagree with me do so not because of a legitimate disagreement, but rather because their understanding of the game is less refined than my own."
Although Fissure is a house, it is the sole remaining storm card that can be the basis for a deck in pauper. I mean, it's not like you can go lethal with a storm count of 20 and Sprouting Vines.
Before entirely cutting storm out of pauper, I would like to see how Fissure plays when it's not backed by a land base that's better than anything else Pauper has to offer.
A) Ben Bleiweiss is talking far, far, out of his ass; or
B) Wizards is leaking info to him and screwing with the secondary market in an unprecedented manner.
Whichever one it is, to create a situation that depicts you as being either A or B for the sake of making money off "premium content" that people have already paid for when you are already the 5000 lb. gorilla of the secondary market of the world's most successful collectible card game and your prices are acknowledged as being higher than everyone else's...
It's worse than a millionaire stooping to pick up a penny. It's like Croesus digging a hole to China to snag an atom of copper.
1. It's not elegant at all to make shrinking power dependent on the creature dealing damage.
2. Incinerate is not better than Lightning Bolt in every way (I can't believe you wrote that), and the opposite is also false. Why did you even go there when the obvious comparison is Lightning Bolt / Searing Spear?
3. It is legal in Standard, therefore it was printed for Standard.
The only thing we're in need of is for Wizards to acknowledge the cards they print should be useful for more than an hour after you open them.
Also:
Right on. I was thinking "Target attacking creature", but yours is better AND it fits ORZHOV FLAVOR.
EDIT: Oh, and somehow I missed this:
Ahem. Mogg Maniac, great-grand-daddy of Spitemare and Boros Reckoner, looks red to me.
I would like to see Cloudpost banned just because every control shell I start to build in pauper starts out great and then I realize it would be better with four Cloudpost and four Glimmerpost and then screw it, why not just netdeck instead of playing a bad version of 8post.
Lands that tap for more than one mana (and Cloudposts tap for a good deal more than that with regularity) are quite good. Cloudpost is banned in Modern for a reason.
It could grip it by the husk!
On the one hand, Modern Masters will increase the supply.
On the other, new entries into the Pauper card pool will increase the demand.
In particular, I have often wished for Perilous Research and Moldervine Cloak while deckbuilding.
Guess these will also be newly legal in Modern Pauper now, too.
This was my first thought.
Looks like Whale.dek just may make Jump playable.
Actually, I took the trouble of deciphering that wall of text. It is paramount that he learns to say something worth understanding before he learns to paragraph.
Incredible as it seems, his gibberish may be for our own protection. I will summarize it to save you time:
This card does work on creatures with +1/+1 counters, don't forget. Maybe this will see play alongside Vigean Hydropon.
Seriously, it's well established that Slivers live in hives.
Wow, I just assumed it was permanent because most similar effects are permanent. (Not Whim of Volrath, I realize.) This is trash, my mistake.
Note that mana of a color the opponent can't use may as well be colorless. The above strategy leads to a soft lock, yes?
Thus far, I've only mentioned on the minimum usage of the Magical Hack side of the card. Your opponent is practically guaranteed to have some basics out, and probably some shocklands, too.
The Sleight of Mind side makes protection irrelevant (other than blue, due to targeting restrictions... I think Skylasher might have been made with this in mind...), or make your own protection more relevant.
In limited, it can turn off opposing Denizens by making them trigger on a color the opponent isn't playing. I'm sure in R2R limited there are a ton of such tricks. I don't play limited, just saying for those who do.
Admittedly, Magical Hack and Sleight of Mind can target spells as well as permanents, but Trait Doctoring compares favorably in many ways to its more direct precedent, Whim of Volrath, which shares its targeting restriction.