2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • posted a message on Pack Rat and Mutate
    1. Characteristic defining abilities overwrite the printed text so your Gemrazer will be a 0/0 and promptly be sent to the graveyard.

    2. Should you activate its ability you will produce a copy the same as if a clone was cast. The copy will have all the copiable characteristics. It will be Green, named Gemrazer, be a beast, have the when it mutates text, and the CDA defining its p/t so it will be whatever the first card is. Considering you activated its ability you must control at least one rat so it should also be a 1/1 or you may have many rats or other anthems.

    3. Once more assuming you control more rats or an anthem to keep your "not a packrat" alive when you resolve the ability and create a copy you will immediately choose one of them to be kept and all other legendary cards with the same name will be sent to the graveyard.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Kaalia of the Vast + Utvara Hellkite
    No, as you suspected Utvara Hellkite only triggers when a dragon is declared as an attacker, not put onto the battlefield attacking.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Live copies of mutate
    Quote from Boyachi »
    With Essence of the Wild or Infinite Reflection if I mutate the “Prime” creature do all other creatures I control also get a mutate trigger or do they just “update” without a trigger as part of the continuous action.
    You didn't ask this question but your question implies a misunderstanding of Essence of the Wild and Infinite Reflections. If you mutate or otherwise change those cards copiable values it won't change any card that is already a copy of those cards; those creatures were set when they entered and never "update". Future creatures will copy the "updated" version but all of the previous clones will stay as they were before.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Double Masters 2XM New reprint product
    Quote from Draymore01095 »
    What is the chance this where enemy fetches will show up?

    Hopefully at rare.
    0% early on they dispelled that rumor before it gained any traction. They said they promise fetchs this year but not this set.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Banned and restricted announcement (offical announcement)
    Quote from user_938036 »

    Isn't Dunning-Krueger awesome?
    I appreciate you conceding the moment you ran out of coherent arguments rather than devolving into ridiculous name calling. Few have your courage to admit when they are wrong and to even name their flaws.


    Nice try. What I am conceding is the following.

    I am educated in this field. I have been employed in this field. I have taught in this field. You are mistaken in nearly every sentence of yours I've bothered to read, and that is obvious to anyone with actual field knowledge. However it is apparent that you are very pleased with your opinions, so even if I took the time to teach you, that time would be wasted. I therefore don't choose to spare that time, and I am content to let you "be wrong on the internet".
    I am glad you have taken the time to flaunt your credentials without ever providing any kind of information or argument. We all know that only credentials matter and because I haven't declared credentials whether or not I have them is irrelevant. You have declared your credentials and thus your complete lack of an argument wins hands down.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Banned and restricted announcement (offical announcement)

    Isn't Dunning-Krueger awesome?
    I appreciate you conceding the moment you ran out of coherent arguments rather than devolving into ridiculous name calling. Few have your courage to admit when they are wrong and to even name their flaws.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Banned and restricted announcement (offical announcement)
    Quote from user_938036 »
    Quote from Marl Karx »
    It's also kind of dense to say "I'm sure they applied all the lessons they learned over the years" in a situation where they clearly decided to go against the tide because they were sure they were right and everybody else (even the player base if it came down to it) was wrong.
    Anything new is "against the Tide" so I don't see any problem with it and I believe I can count on one hand the number of times players have been right about a mechanic being horrible or broken when R&D thought it was fine. But every single set players are wrong about a card or mechanic being unplayable or broken. So if anything, finding what the player base thinks is right and doing the opposite or at least something else is at least a very good idea and at worst an ok idea.


    Precisely what collectible card game have you been playing for the past 25 years? It certainly hasn't been Magic. And that bolded part is just ridiculous. Please please invest your entire net worth in a gaming enterprise (or a business of any kind, really), take that advice yourself and become so destitute you cannot afford the internet connection necessary to spout such disinformation.

    Seriously.
    Are you conflating "right" with "enjoy". That is the only way I can imagine you would come to the conclusion you did. Player bases are so laughably wrong with such consistency on what is right that doing the opposite couldn't be nearly as dangerous as doing what they think is right. If you are confusing it with what player bases enjoy then obviously you aren't going to get anywhere doing the opposite of what players enjoy, though they are often wrong about what they will and won't enjoy they are never wrong about what they do and don't enjoy.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Banned and restricted announcement (offical announcement)
    Quote from Marl Karx »
    It's also kind of dense to say "I'm sure they applied all the lessons they learned over the years" in a situation where they clearly decided to go against the tide because they were sure they were right and everybody else (even the player base if it came down to it) was wrong.
    Anything new is "against the Tide" so I don't see any problem with it and I believe I can count on one hand the number of times players have been right about a mechanic being horrible or broken when R&D thought it was fine. But every single set players are wrong about a card or mechanic being unplayable or broken. So if anything, finding what the player base thinks is right and doing the opposite or at least something else is at least a very good idea and at worst an ok idea. I'm still of the opinion that companions as a whole aren't a problem. Lurrus has an ability that is obviously broken with 0 that can be sacrificed for mana. The companion ability on them makes decks seeking to take advantage of such an ability overwhelmingly consistent but I believe that without the ability it would have still been a problem, though one that could have been solved by a restriction. I am willing to believe that I am wrong and that if left alone in a few weeks there will be no decks that can compete with companion decks but I just don't see that as likely.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Banned and restricted announcement (offical announcement)
    Quote from Marl Karx »
    Quote from Dragoon91 »
    Quote from Marl Karx »
    Quote from Dragoon91 »
    Quote from NGW »
    This is something the mechanic already went through when it was originally tested 20 years ago when Maro first found out that this ***** is busted and not good for the game, as he detailed in an article he posted five years ago. Then he said "fug it" and did it anyways for Ikoria. And look what happened...


    Out of curiosity, do you have a link to that article?


    Here is one:

    https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/making-magic/gimme-hand-2010-08-13

    Ctrl+F "Draw #2" to get straight to the right subsection if you are lazy
    Thank you! If I understand that bit correctly though, it was broken because MaRo made basically "companion" lands that will always be in your opening hand. It doesn't mention them being restricted to one copy per deck or them being legendary. Obviously, something like that would be utterly broken. Just play four of those lands and your deck doesn't even need other lands in it! Companion isn't anywhere near that level of power.


    It's actually kind of unclear exactly what he was referring to when. It can't just be "lands that are guaranteed to start in your hand" because then he would have talked exclusively about that rather than a broader discussion of the mechanic.
    It sounds like an entire group of cards were designed with this mechanic. But it was the lands that made him decide, without even playtesting, that the mechanic was "bah-roken". It's reasonable to think that when working on companion they looked back on what was done there and avoided any obvious pitfalls that they encountered then such as free lands. I still don't think any companion, besides Lurrus, is broken. The mechanic is strong but the restrictions are real and most of the cards aren't even that good.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Banned and restricted announcement (offical announcement)
    Quote from user_938036 »
    The random card loss makes it completely unplayable. No sane player would gamble with their ability to play at all just to get a decent to strong card. The only formats that would want them would be vintage where every card is insanly broken so trading one of them isn't a big deal.


    You need to look at the bigger picture and what I said. You GAIN a guaranteed card with Companions. No where else in the game of Magic are you GUARANTEED a card in your opening hand, NOWHERE. This is the exact opposite of variance. So if you introduce a guaranteed card and promote less variance, it needs to be balanced by more variance, OR an appropriate penalty for that guaranteed card. If the Companion can offer the strength to overcome the addition of variance, then it will be played. Think about it a little bit more before you "pish posh" it. Companions can't continue the way they are unless they power them down a bit (via lower power level OR higher casting cost). They can keep the power up but it would come with a cost. Many SANE players would pay that cost for a guaranteed card if powerful enough.
    That is exactly the problem I bring up. None of the companions are good enough to risk turning a solid hand into unkeepable junk. Except in formats where their abilities are actually broken. The risk of keeping a two land hand that goes down to one is far to significant for any of the companions in standard, historic, pioneer or modern. It would reduce the range of keepable hands significantly and none of them as so game ending that they are worth such a blow to your deck.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Banned and restricted announcement (offical announcement)
    The random card loss makes it completely unplayable. No sane player would gamble with their ability to play at all just to get a decent to strong card. The only formats that would want them would be vintage where every card is insanly broken so trading one of them isn't a big deal.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Mirror March Mutate Ruling
    If you choose to mutate a creature you will not flip coins for Mirror March because no creature entered the battlefield. Mutating causes the characteristics of a creature already on the battlefield to change it does not enter the battlefield.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Banned and restricted announcement (offical announcement)
    Assuming that it does eventually happen, I wonder what kind of rules fix for companions do they have in mind?
    If they don't just shut the whole thing down then they would likely make you have a forced mulligan to use a companion so they aren't 'free'.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Banned and restricted announcement (offical announcement)
    Quote from user-11102155 »
    i wonder about the winota ban.
    do i understand it right, she is banned because to many play her ? popularity shouldnt be a reason for ban in my opinion. if the deck would be problematic with a high win rate, okay, but because she gets played to much ???
    They start by saying she has too high win rates. Its the high win rates which are making her played a lot. They then say they are normally forgiving of high win rates in more casual setting like brawl but her increasing popularity combined with her already impressive win rate made them take action. Meaning if a commander is too strong but unpopular or popular but weak they won't ban. It has to be strong and popular.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Spellslinger Mechanics Help
    That change makes it better, charge focused decks don't have a free roll but you can't play a flash charge deck though you will want to be concerned about the number of instants that lead to a game win that are in the set. If a flash deck is viable it shuts down this mechanic hard. You also should start with proliferate as a set mechanic. If your mechanic is broken with proliferate you want to know early so you can consider if its a problem or if it's fine.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.