2019 Holiday Exchange!
A New and Exciting Beginning
The End of an Era
  • posted a message on Masquerade Ball (Another Inspired Reprise)

    The object here was to suggest that the ruling for this function should change the name and effects that reference names, without requiring additional text to explain that. As for game-breaking effects like Extirpate, that is what the restricted and banned list is for. One shouldn't be wary of using those, so long as they're not getting carried away and abusing them either. With good balance, they're a technician's friend.
    You never want rulings to do the work of card text. If the intent was to mess with cards that look at card names then the effect needs to be written out. Otherwise, you run the problem of making people think that Conspiracy and its ilk make all lords affect the creature type you choose. There is little benefit to trying to roll that effect into that text and there is obvious and immediate downside to do such.

    If you want to add an effect that isn't present. Add the effect don't just say "well, that effect is also there".

    You want your language as precise and concise as possible so as to keep opportunities open rather than creating roadblocks in design because you were too lazy earlier to spell out an effect. This is the problem you are having with your "Or" in your desu ex abilities. The use of Or has already been made clear to you but you want to muddy the language and cut off freedoms because you like the words better.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on The Coronavirus Pandemic and the Future of the Local Game Store (LGS)
    Of course not everyone has access to Social Media or they don't trust it enough due to the toxicity of communities they simply try to avoid due to PC / Cancel Culture. So at best you're stuck having to rely on peoples' phone numbers and e-mail addresses for communication especially If you don't own a smartphone in order to setup playgroups for certain games.
    This may seem overly ignorant and privileged but is it actually possible to go through life as an adult right now without a smartphone? Also you may have larger problems then lack of opportunity to play a fairly expensive hobby if you can't own a smartphone.

    I know a number of unemployed and underemployed people who have received free government phones. And those are capable of everything as long as you hang out near a Starbucks or some equivalent.

    While I personally avoid the usual social media sites(facebook, twitter, Instagram?) for the exact reasons you mentioned even someone as antisocial as me has found places where I am comfortable communicating with others.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on The Coronavirus Pandemic and the Future of the Local Game Store (LGS)
    Well I would assume that MTG's original design in the 1990's and what it's become to the fans who've remained loyal to the game up until this point are two different, but still interconnected things. If you have the opportunity to play MTG at home you can still enjoy it in Paper. But let's be honest, it gets old playing the same person over and over unless you change decks inbetween matches. Even the same 2 or 3 people. It gets stale quickly BUT If you're able to go to your LGS weekly and play in semi serious ranked games then you can practice with your family during the week for those FNM events. In other words, "At Home" Play is completely linked to LGS Play. The one needs the other to a certain degree.
    No, "at home" play isn't "Completely" linked to LGS play. LGS play makes up a minority of games played, while "at home" numbers are hard to actually quantify and "at home" is often also counted as "Anywhere that isn't an LGS or official tournament" so the games you get in at the college cafeteria while you wait for you evening classes counts as "at home" play by most metrics.

    Long story short. Don't equate LGS's presence with the frequency of play. They do serve a vital role in the tournament structure and as a place for communities to grow. But those same communities grow literally anywhere thanks to social media. LGSs just happen to sell the product that everyone is gathering for. If you are at all worried about the health of paper magic then first, don't be. Magic can't currently, nor in the foreseeable future, exist without paper magic. So instead, fear for the life of magic as a whole and you might realize how ridiculous that train of thought actually is.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Lich's Mirror and Teferi's Protection
    Quote from Rezzahan »
    If you'd lose due to having 0 or less life, then Teferi's Protection has that covered already and the Mirror couldn't even apply as there is no "you lose" event to replace.
    Teferi's Protection doesn't actually protect you from having 0 or less life. This can be relevant in a number of scenarios most notably if you have a card like Phyrexian Unlife in play and are at 0 or less life. In such a scenario casting Teferi's protection will cause you to lose the game.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Burnt offering + X casting cost
    No, when an effect looks at the casting cost of a spell with X everywhere but the stack the X is treated as 0. So a Lightning Serpent will only get you 1 mana from a Burnt Offering.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Masquerade Ball (Another Inspired Reprise)
    Quote from rowanalpha »
    Of the actual Masquerade Ball ability, it is an interesting twist on Mirror Gallery, and I'd have to check the rules for how cards that refer to cards with their same names (Squadron Hawk) would interact with this because if, for instance, Squadron Hawk could pull any number of creatures into your hand, this would be crazy and undercosted at 4 mana. It feels like a blue mechanic though, not black.
    Squadron Hawk wouldn't be able to find any cards with this out. You will look in your deck for cards named Squadron Hawk and only find cards named Masquerade Guest. To get the effect of Squadron Hawk finding any number of creatures you would need a completely different effect.

    If an effect would use a card's name use Masquerade Guest instead.

    Though such an effect is obviously broken if combined with the rest of the card because Eradicate would exile all creatures form a player's deck, hand and graveyard.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Obelisk Spider Vs Wasitora, Nekoru Queen
    Both Wasitora and the Spider have combat damage triggers. Meaning they both trigger at the same time. So Wasitora's ability will be on the stack when it gets the-1/-1 counter. We don't go back and undue the damage that was dealt because the creature is smaller now. So Wasitora's trigger resolves and you get a cat.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Rewind
    Why is your thread titled Rewind?

    If you cast Narest's reversal targeting Expropriate you will do as the reversal says and put the Expropriate into its owner's hand. No part of Expropriate says that if it tried to leave the stack in anyway, exile it as you find on flashback cards.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Goblin Pioneer
    "Powerful enough" is 99% context based. Is this ment to be a common in a set with landfall? Or is it a rare in a coreset? Or possibly a plant for legacy in a masters set?

    As a common in a landfall set it is great. Red isn't supposed to have strong reliable ramp but every color is allowed to grab its own basics. This is at a rate that is fine if the land entering is worth more than a land entering. Though it might honestly be a bit pushed for this slot. For standard power levels it should probably cost 2 to activate. So it isn't beating green in a best case scenario.

    As a rare it should still cost more but it also needs more effects to be exciting.

    For legacy I am ill informed. I believe it would have to also destroy an opponents non basic land if it failed to get a mountain. Cause legacy is stupid and broken.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on The Coronavirus Pandemic and the Future of the Local Game Store (LGS)
    I take great comfort in knowing that anyone who cries the doom of paper magic has no idea how any thing actually functions and can be safely ignored.

    For those who would like light shine on why this is so. Paper magic and paper play make up that VAST majority of magics existence. The "pro" community that makes up all of tournament play is incredibly visible but also incredibly small. Believe it or not the majority of magic cards are bought by casual players who are buying them to play with their friends and families. Everyone who cries doom is either vastly ill informed or deliberately fear mongering.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Masquerade Ball (Another Inspired Reprise)
    It's a very interesting take on Mirror Gallery. As that was over costed dropping to 4 seems good. Your deus ex keyword is a monster that makes this simultaneously unplayable and a game ending engine. Allowing the opponent to fill back up can be game breaking but it's also such an efficient draw four that it can be it's own engine.
    That said we have an existing template for doing this with creature types. You can easily port it into names.
    Each creature is named Masquerade Guest. The same is true for creature spells and creature cards that aren't on the battlefield.
    The "legend rule" doesn't apply.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Commander in hand, and memory jqr
    Quote from Hoedo_Baggins »
    So in this instance, as opposed to being in the deck and exiled facedown you have a choice to put it back since you have "knowledge" of your commander being in your hand when it's exiled face down?
    Not quite. A commander that is somehow in your library that is then exiled face down can still be moved to the command zone. This is because the property of being a commander isn't a characteristic that can be obscured. It is a property of the card which can not be hidden. No matter where it is or what its current state is, it is a commander.

    As an example. If your commander is in your library and your opponent manages to exile it face down without your knowledge through means of a card such as Praetor's Grasp. They are obligated to inform you that your commander has moved to exile and you may move it to the command zone.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Prophetic Banisher (An Inspired Reprise)
    Quote from DJK3654 »

    Dude, what does that mean? You've got to stop doing this. Stop with the weird lingo and just say what you mean plainly so we can all just get on with it.
    What context? What is replacement and alternative context here and what's the difference? What exactly does outpost here mean? What the hell is wording composure? And what does this all mean with regard to the wording changes I suggested? "Named card" doesn't even appear in your original wording either?

    Just want to clarify that this is not how debate works.

    If everything needs to be explained to you like this, then you are unqualified to debate.
    It is a debate, he was contesting me.

    Can you imagine going up to the podium and being like, "Ugh, what does all this stuff mean?"

    Can you imagine going to an mtg tournament and being like, "Excuse me, what does all this stuff mean?"

    Let's all understand the fundamentals of language and the subject before we begin to do anything, especially "offer our help".
    First, this is exactly how a debate works. Except you wouldn't go up to the podium and say "Ugh, what does all this stuff mean?" you would do as DJK did and say "Clarify what you just said". If you participate in debates and expect to not be asked to clarify your statements when they aren't clear then you are participating in "bad faith". Meaning you have no intention of debating you just want to state your case. You did admit to not wanting to debate and just wanting to sate your preference but that entire attitude is counterproductive to the purpose of this site.

    As for participating in an MTG tournament and asking "Excuse me, what does all this stuff mean?". If you do that a judge will politely explain what it all means because that is their purpose. If you are still confused because of the language they used then you are expected to ask follow up questions to clarify what the specific words they used meant.

    All in all, reality is far diverged from your position. In reality, when holding a conversation or debate one is expected to clarify their stance and even their specific word choice and meaning when asked.

    Ignoring all that and talking about the card. Choosing a card and then locking cards based on the chosen cards name is bad for streamlining coherence. A cleaner method that opens up a diversity of context is "When ~ deals damage to an opponent look at that player's hand. Choose a nonland card name. Until your next turn opponents can't cast spells with the chosen name."
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Commander in hand, and memory jqr
    Yes, whenever your commander changes zones you get the option of sending it to the command zone.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Double Masters 2XM New reprint product
    Quote from Xcric »
    Quote from wallycaine »
    Quote from xaltair »
    This was my point too, it would suck to open a $16 pack and get a $3 rare or mythic. It would also suck even more to buy a $300-$400 box and find out all your rares and mythic amount to about $150-$180.

    I mean if you buy a standard box for $110 and you get $60 worth of rares/mythic it already feels pretty bad, but imagine buying something 3 times as much, the feeling should be 3 times as strong. I mean if there is only one $100 card in the set and the rest are $50 or less in value then it'll be hard to justify the price of the box at $300 unless you can get 6 of those $50 cards in the box whether they may be rares/mythics/foils or whatever.

    It's like buying a Collector's pack for $20 and when you open it you get $8 worth of cards in value, or even $10, it feels bad.
    The thing is, financially and mathematically, this has to happen at least some of the time. If the expected value of the cards in a pack is more than the value of the pack, then retailers are just going to shred the packs and sell the individual cards until the prices go down enough that that's no longer true. Or they will only sell the packs for more than their normal price. So there always has to be a decent amount of cards that are worth less than the price of the pack, in order to make sure the EV doesn't exceed the price. And if you want there to be high value reprints, such as 100 dollar cards, then you need some really bad stinkers to balance it out.

    yeah but at the same time i think the whole point in having an msrp is to help control that. if the suggest retail is $3.00, and that lgs is charging $10, you can easily go somewhere else thanks to the internet that is charging the $3.00. they did away with msrp, and now a hell of a lot of stores either go off tcg player, or whatever other retailers are charging. this means that if the majority of retailers are charging $10 instead of $3, the price gets bumped up and its a lot more difficult to find it at a lower price. further, i'd argue that the continued, and even increased popularity of buying at big box stores instead of your lgs proves this as they're far more beholden to a universal price among their stores.

    I have never really bought into this argument.

    Remember the old Rats' Nest Precon Deck from Betrayers of Kamigawa? The one with an MSRP around $20 that happened to include a $20 card (according to MTGgoldfish price history, that price was pretty constant right out of the gate)? Finding that deck for its MSRP (at least in my experience and those of my friends) was all but impossible back then as selling it for that value was tantamount to throwing away free money. The thought that someone online will have it for cheaper doesn't really work so well when the people online can reliably tear up the product and make a profit on the content.
    It was actually the offline people that had it for MSRP because they wouldn't check online to see that it was worth more than its MSRP. I personally bought at least 10 of those decks from Gamestops in my area because Gamestop wasn't a card shop so they didn't realize they were underselling the item.

    Still, that wasn't because of MSRP that was because information was less spread out and the large store didn't care about this niche product. Only large stores cared about MSRP because they didn't actually care what the product was worth they just bought and sold it. The idea that by removing the MSRP they are causing more price gouging is foolish. The large stores still sell at the "Totally not MSRP" regardless of actual value while the specialty stores still sell at "True Value".
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.