If i use the 3rd and 4th ability of Dromoka's Command (place a +1/+1 counter on target creature, and target creature you control fights target creature you don't control) and target a creature with heroic (say Favored Hoplite), does heroic trigger two times, or just once.
Resumes are a set of qualifications. If you think the subject adds value to your resume, include it. Note that there is a difference between “weight” and “value”.
I am a magic player who regularly wins FNM and local tournaments, but I have never made top-8 at a PTQ or similarly high-profile event. I would never list Magic, the Gathering as a hobby, but if I were to ever top-8 a high-profile event, I may consider listing that on my resume (in broadly understandable terms). My logic is that an individual involved in the hiring process would not care about my hobbies, but might care about my accomplishments.
Likewise, I used to be my World of Warcraft guild raid leader (back in the day of 40-man Molten Core and Blackwing Lair raids). Although I believe that those skills are extremely valuable in a workplace environment, explaining to someone what a “raid” was that was not intimately familiar with WoW would not be valuable. For that reason, I would never list “Raid Leader” on my resume. I might, however, bring the subject up during an interview with someone if I felt it was appropriate, and that individual expressed a knowledge of MMORPGs.
I used to work seasonally at a Haunted House, and I used to list that on my resume. I actually credit that item with being a good ice-breaker with one of the individuals who interviewed me at my current position. Contrary to popular belief, most businesses do not want “worker drones” and being involved with a Haunted House (the one I worked at was particularly well known) was a good way to show that I was human. There was a good chance that anyone involved in the hiring process would have heard about (or visited) the Haunted House that I worked at, and people are always curious about the behind the scenes at places like that. In that regard, it was an asset.
After a few moments of deliberation the judge explained that this was not my opponent’s first offense on this particular infraction and issued a game loss to my opponent. Game three, I did not just cut my opponents deck, I riffle shuffled 8 times. My opponent got stuck on 2 mana and I won handily.
Did the judge think that your opponent was drawing extra cards by mistake or something? If he was cheating, that's not a game loss, it's a DQ and a report to the DCI. Doesn't matter if it's FNM or the Pro Tour.
Why do you suspect mana weaving? Curving out happens, that doesn't necessarily mean mana weaving.
My sense is that the judge is trying to give this player the benefit of the doubt. This player MAY be a serial cheater, but he might also be prone to making mistakes. I happen to know the person who trained this judge that that person was extremely careful about not wielding “judge power” with too heavy a hand. I assume that this judge is trying to follow his trainer’s example. I assume that, if this player continues to have these types of infractions, his penalties will increase.
I suspect mana weaving by drawing on my recollection of past games against this player. My recollection (although I do realize it is potentially flawed/biased) is this player’s mana is extremely consistent. I also can’t remember this player ever riffle shuffling. Additionally, this player plays a deck that is prone to mana issues, and the only instance that I can recall where he experienced mana issues is when I riffle shuffled his deck. Lastly, I recall conversations with other LGS players who have played against this player who recall much the same experience – no mana issues, always the right card at the right time, etc.
Also, I’ve been reading about “cheater profiles” and this player does happen to fit much of what is out there. He is a good magic player. He is charismatic and friendly. He is conversational. If you told most players that this player was caught cheating, their first reaction would be “that guy? No way!”
Mostly this is just a hunch that I intend to investigate. I’ve decided to play an extremely fast deck next FNM and make every attempt to sit near this player. I intend to observe his play and glean whatever information I can. I don’t want an innocent player DQ’s for dumb errors, but I also don’t want the rest of my LGS to lose out to a cheater.
My apologies if this is the wrong sub-forum. Please feel free to move if it is.
This past FNM (8-1-2014) I was in game 2 of my first match (having lost game 1). My back was against the wall. My opponent had curved out perfectly and jammed threat after threat after threat. My opponent passed and I asked; “Cards in hand?”
My opponent answered; “Three.”
I counted every battlefield, hand and graveyard card of my opponents and came to 13. I then counted every battlefield, hand and graveyard card of my own and came to 11. There had been no mulligans. I had one fewer draw than he had (having gone first). I counted again, checked for any card draw spells (and found none), and then counted again. After a few moments of trying to explain the card disparity I called the judge over.
After a few moments of deliberation the judge explained that this was not my opponent’s first offense on this particular infraction and issued a game loss to my opponent. Game three, I did not just cut my opponents deck, I riffle shuffled 8 times. My opponent got stuck on 2 mana and I won handily.
After the match, I started to contemplate all the other matches that particular opponent and I had played in the past, and come to some broad generalizations. He always seems to have the cards he needs when he needs them. He always seems to curve out perfectly, and never misses a land drop.
I’m starting to suspect that this particular player is not only drawing extra cards, but also mana weaving. I doubt that, if this player is a serial cheater, he will every draw extra cards against me in the future, but mana weaving is more difficult to catch. My understanding is that many judges are taught how to identify mana weaving during a deck check. My question is, are there any tell-tale signs that I can look for that might tip me off that I am being presented with a woven deck? I already know how to identify double nickel pile shuffling and their variations, but is there anything else I should be looking for before calling a judge over?
I don’t want to be “that guy” who sees cheaters everywhere because he had one opponent cheat against him one time, nor do I want to be “that guy” who gets owned and tells himself he lost because his opponent somehow cheated. I’d just like a little broader understanding to help protect myself and my LGS from players who might intentionally, or unintentionally be cheating.
Also, if I do see a sign of a woven deck that is presented in a match that I am not involved in, is it appropriate to call a judge?
Cracked a misprinted Hoarding Dragon at a pre-release today. I don't know much about misprints. Does this make the card worthless or are their collectors looking for misprints? Any input would be appreciated.
Round about 2007 I went on vacation to Los Vegas with my girlfriend at the time. She wanted to take a few days to visit friends in Utah, but because of her friend’s strict Mormon beliefs, she felt extremely uncomfortable about bringing me with her to visit her friends. So, I had a few days by myself in Los Vegas.
It was awesome. I can honestly say that exploring Los Vegas by myself was one of the best vacations I ever had. If you like to gamble, you can sit down at a table and not worry about anyone else’s schedule. You can pay for a single ticket to any show you want. It’s a lot of fun.
With the end of the format basically at hand, outside the eventual mega-standard RTR Block + M14 + Theros Block + M15, we're looking at mana curve that is, on average, smaller. There are simply more cards that are better at low casting cost.
iincarna: Even the friends I have who expect me to serve premium beers, drink to get really drunk. But I'm not gonna spend 10-15 bucks more than I could be spending, simply because 2 or 3 of my 9-10 friends are picky. Especially when I'm paying to have food to grill for everyone too.
Again, to anyone here who has disagreed with me: If I gave you a playset of Serra Angels for free, no questions asked... would you say "thank you", or would you say "but these aren't Baneslayers"? It is the same thing, except substitute Serra Angel with "PBR" and Baneslayer with "premium beer". And if you were ever to answer the latter, I would question how you were raised tbh.
Here is the root of the issue… You are holding others to your standard of value (beer, getting drunk, partying) while simultaneously refusing to recognize other individuals standard of value as relevant.
You are free to run your parties as you see fit. You don’t really have the right to get perturbed at individuals who don’t like your choice of beer, however. To me, PBR and similar cheap beers are absolutely disgusting. It seem as if you are trying to say that I am obligated to enjoy your choice of party beer because it’s free. There are plenty of free things that are awful.
Your Serra Angel analogy is actually much better than you think. If you came up to me and handed me a play set of Serra Angels, I would appreciate the GESTURE, but my attitude wouldn’t be: “OMG! I need to jam these into my deck wherever they fit!” My attitude would be to accept the Serra Angels and politely file them away under “Cards I could not care less about.” YOU think the Serra Angels have value to ME, but they don’t and there is nothing you can do to change that… nor should you. Bad cards are bad cards. Bad beer is bad beer.
You party however you want to party. Why is it that you have a problem with people who drink whatever they like to drink? You’re holding others to a standard that you yourself do not adhere to.
A - "Time to grow up"? Are you really that smug, arrogant, and ignorant to think that your form of partying is somehow more "mature" or valid than mine?
You may not realize it, but you just answered your original question right here. You may party to get drunk, but not all people do. If you accept that not all people do, than you must also accept that many people’s own definition of a good time revolves around drinking quality beer with quality friends. Drinking cheap, low-quality beer is not my definition of a good time. That doesn’t mean I’m a beer snob. That just means my definition of a good time is different than yours and you appear to hold the philosophy that, so long as no one is getting hurt, people are free to indulge in their own definition of a good time as they see fit.
My social group does not party to get drunk. We socialize and enjoy quality beer and getting drunk does happen occasionally, but that is usually a sign that we need to stop drinking. The experience of taste and quality is the central theme around our beer drinking events. Getting drunk is merely an unintended consequence. To me, drinking something like PBR is literally like drinking stale rainwater drained from a puddle in which animal poop has been festering for several days. If someone handed you a red solo cup filled with that, would you smile and drink it because it’s “free”?
If I want to have a party in which getting drunk is the objective, beer is the absolute last beverage I would consider serving. I would have my freezer stocked with vodka, rum, whiskey, and maybe even have some wine in the refrigerator.
I will be receiving a lawsuit settlement to the tune of $3400. I have to remain a little hush-hush on the details, but a certain for-profit online school based in Arizona can go to hell.
The sensible thing to do would be to save the money, or invest it, but to be honest, I don’t really want to be sensible. I’m sensible in every aspect of my life. I have a good job, I have my bills under control, and I have a strong savings and 401k. I want to do something with this money that is NOT sensible.
Now, I’m not about to head to the casino, drop it all on black, and let come what may, but I did have the idea of taking my girlfriend, her two sisters, and their significant others, on a short cruise. My girlfriend said that that idea made her feel a little uncomfortable (we handle our finances very equitably and she doesn’t like feeling indebted). So, I’m here looking for ideas.
What not-overly-sensible but non-overly-ridiculous ideas does $3400 buy?
Checklands (M10+Innistrad Block) would be acceptable. They were only made overpowered by the simultaneous existence of the shocklands within the same Standard enviroment. Since all the scrylands are "lands" an not "Plains and Islands" the Standard environment manabase should not be overpowered.
However, if for some reason it was beneficial to me, I could also choose to double the 3 damage from Lightning Strike to 6, and then add 2 to that damage for a total of 8 via Pyromancer’s Gauntlet.
Inflation of the USD, they keep printing off more money so everything gets more expensive,
This literally has almost no influence over the price of Magic Cards… particularly eternal format staples.
Since Magic was released in 1993 the cumulative rate of inflation is 63.5% (http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/). A $2.45 booster in 1993 is worth $4.01 now. Good luck trying to find someone willing to sell an Alpha, Beta, or Revised booster for $4.01. Those boosters are obscenely priced because they are extremely difficult to come by and contain the potential for extremely rare cards.
Another analysis is the price of the card Desecration Demon. In early 2013 its median price was between $1.53 and $2.79. Then, something weird happened in August 2013 when its price began to spike as high as $11.69 in October 2013. Its price then steadily declined until it settled at about $4.51 today.
The 1.4% 2013 inflation rate should put that $1.53 price at about $1.55. But it isn’t. What factor could possibly inflate that price?
The card was not good in any format until the release of Theros made this card a Tier 1 deck staple. People wanted it, demand went up sharply. After people got it, demand declined and so price kept pace.
Lets look at another card; Thragtusk. In early 2013 its median price was about $13.18. Its price declined steadily until about October 2013 when it tanked to about $3.50. It’s price continues to decline today.
What factor could possibly account for a cards price diminishing despite the inflation rate?
Thragtusk was a Standard staple. People recognized that it was good, but not good enough for eternal formats and its demand diminished steadily until Standard rotation, at which point it completely tanked.
Inflation and Fed policy has about as much impact on the cost of Magic cards as the price of tea in China.
And this makes more sense than reprints why? Just because Wizards made Modern based on the new card frame doesn't mean that if they change the card frame there will automatically be a new format for it.
I believe there will eventually be a new format based on the new card design for numerous reasons that are not necessarily on topic. Card price in relation to eternal formats is only one aspect upon which I base my prediction. I believe that many exceptionally powerful cards and card combinations within eternal formats are viewed as “mistakes” by Wizards. I believe that there is little interest in Wizards to “retrofit” eternal formats whenever a new “mistake” crops up. Legacy/Vintage was Magic 1.0. Modern was Magic 2.0. The new card border is Wizards understanding that there will be a need for a Magic 3.0 and way to communicate to new players what cards can be played within Magic 3.0.
I suspect Modern Masters was a “band aid” solution to the issue of card availability within Modern. I also believe that the result of Modern Masters was proof that, despite “band aids” prices will continue to rise and the long-term financial sustainability of current eternal formats is untenable. Wizards focus will be on supporting Magic 3.0 in the future. It’s a software business model that is quite popular. Wizards just figured out a way to do it with physical objects.
I don’t really see why this prediction is so outlandish.
Thanks
I am a magic player who regularly wins FNM and local tournaments, but I have never made top-8 at a PTQ or similarly high-profile event. I would never list Magic, the Gathering as a hobby, but if I were to ever top-8 a high-profile event, I may consider listing that on my resume (in broadly understandable terms). My logic is that an individual involved in the hiring process would not care about my hobbies, but might care about my accomplishments.
Likewise, I used to be my World of Warcraft guild raid leader (back in the day of 40-man Molten Core and Blackwing Lair raids). Although I believe that those skills are extremely valuable in a workplace environment, explaining to someone what a “raid” was that was not intimately familiar with WoW would not be valuable. For that reason, I would never list “Raid Leader” on my resume. I might, however, bring the subject up during an interview with someone if I felt it was appropriate, and that individual expressed a knowledge of MMORPGs.
I used to work seasonally at a Haunted House, and I used to list that on my resume. I actually credit that item with being a good ice-breaker with one of the individuals who interviewed me at my current position. Contrary to popular belief, most businesses do not want “worker drones” and being involved with a Haunted House (the one I worked at was particularly well known) was a good way to show that I was human. There was a good chance that anyone involved in the hiring process would have heard about (or visited) the Haunted House that I worked at, and people are always curious about the behind the scenes at places like that. In that regard, it was an asset.
I suspect mana weaving by drawing on my recollection of past games against this player. My recollection (although I do realize it is potentially flawed/biased) is this player’s mana is extremely consistent. I also can’t remember this player ever riffle shuffling. Additionally, this player plays a deck that is prone to mana issues, and the only instance that I can recall where he experienced mana issues is when I riffle shuffled his deck. Lastly, I recall conversations with other LGS players who have played against this player who recall much the same experience – no mana issues, always the right card at the right time, etc.
Also, I’ve been reading about “cheater profiles” and this player does happen to fit much of what is out there. He is a good magic player. He is charismatic and friendly. He is conversational. If you told most players that this player was caught cheating, their first reaction would be “that guy? No way!”
Mostly this is just a hunch that I intend to investigate. I’ve decided to play an extremely fast deck next FNM and make every attempt to sit near this player. I intend to observe his play and glean whatever information I can. I don’t want an innocent player DQ’s for dumb errors, but I also don’t want the rest of my LGS to lose out to a cheater.
This past FNM (8-1-2014) I was in game 2 of my first match (having lost game 1). My back was against the wall. My opponent had curved out perfectly and jammed threat after threat after threat. My opponent passed and I asked; “Cards in hand?”
My opponent answered; “Three.”
I counted every battlefield, hand and graveyard card of my opponents and came to 13. I then counted every battlefield, hand and graveyard card of my own and came to 11. There had been no mulligans. I had one fewer draw than he had (having gone first). I counted again, checked for any card draw spells (and found none), and then counted again. After a few moments of trying to explain the card disparity I called the judge over.
After a few moments of deliberation the judge explained that this was not my opponent’s first offense on this particular infraction and issued a game loss to my opponent. Game three, I did not just cut my opponents deck, I riffle shuffled 8 times. My opponent got stuck on 2 mana and I won handily.
After the match, I started to contemplate all the other matches that particular opponent and I had played in the past, and come to some broad generalizations. He always seems to have the cards he needs when he needs them. He always seems to curve out perfectly, and never misses a land drop.
I’m starting to suspect that this particular player is not only drawing extra cards, but also mana weaving. I doubt that, if this player is a serial cheater, he will every draw extra cards against me in the future, but mana weaving is more difficult to catch. My understanding is that many judges are taught how to identify mana weaving during a deck check. My question is, are there any tell-tale signs that I can look for that might tip me off that I am being presented with a woven deck? I already know how to identify double nickel pile shuffling and their variations, but is there anything else I should be looking for before calling a judge over?
I don’t want to be “that guy” who sees cheaters everywhere because he had one opponent cheat against him one time, nor do I want to be “that guy” who gets owned and tells himself he lost because his opponent somehow cheated. I’d just like a little broader understanding to help protect myself and my LGS from players who might intentionally, or unintentionally be cheating.
Also, if I do see a sign of a woven deck that is presented in a match that I am not involved in, is it appropriate to call a judge?
It was awesome. I can honestly say that exploring Los Vegas by myself was one of the best vacations I ever had. If you like to gamble, you can sit down at a table and not worry about anyone else’s schedule. You can pay for a single ticket to any show you want. It’s a lot of fun.
With this this in mind, I've been mulling over replacing Desecration Demon with Master of the Feast.
I find myself losing races that I would have won pre-Journey. I just wanted the community's thoughts on this.
Here is the root of the issue… You are holding others to your standard of value (beer, getting drunk, partying) while simultaneously refusing to recognize other individuals standard of value as relevant.
You are free to run your parties as you see fit. You don’t really have the right to get perturbed at individuals who don’t like your choice of beer, however. To me, PBR and similar cheap beers are absolutely disgusting. It seem as if you are trying to say that I am obligated to enjoy your choice of party beer because it’s free. There are plenty of free things that are awful.
Your Serra Angel analogy is actually much better than you think. If you came up to me and handed me a play set of Serra Angels, I would appreciate the GESTURE, but my attitude wouldn’t be: “OMG! I need to jam these into my deck wherever they fit!” My attitude would be to accept the Serra Angels and politely file them away under “Cards I could not care less about.” YOU think the Serra Angels have value to ME, but they don’t and there is nothing you can do to change that… nor should you. Bad cards are bad cards. Bad beer is bad beer.
You party however you want to party. Why is it that you have a problem with people who drink whatever they like to drink? You’re holding others to a standard that you yourself do not adhere to.
You may not realize it, but you just answered your original question right here. You may party to get drunk, but not all people do. If you accept that not all people do, than you must also accept that many people’s own definition of a good time revolves around drinking quality beer with quality friends. Drinking cheap, low-quality beer is not my definition of a good time. That doesn’t mean I’m a beer snob. That just means my definition of a good time is different than yours and you appear to hold the philosophy that, so long as no one is getting hurt, people are free to indulge in their own definition of a good time as they see fit.
My social group does not party to get drunk. We socialize and enjoy quality beer and getting drunk does happen occasionally, but that is usually a sign that we need to stop drinking. The experience of taste and quality is the central theme around our beer drinking events. Getting drunk is merely an unintended consequence. To me, drinking something like PBR is literally like drinking stale rainwater drained from a puddle in which animal poop has been festering for several days. If someone handed you a red solo cup filled with that, would you smile and drink it because it’s “free”?
If I want to have a party in which getting drunk is the objective, beer is the absolute last beverage I would consider serving. I would have my freezer stocked with vodka, rum, whiskey, and maybe even have some wine in the refrigerator.
The sensible thing to do would be to save the money, or invest it, but to be honest, I don’t really want to be sensible. I’m sensible in every aspect of my life. I have a good job, I have my bills under control, and I have a strong savings and 401k. I want to do something with this money that is NOT sensible.
Now, I’m not about to head to the casino, drop it all on black, and let come what may, but I did have the idea of taking my girlfriend, her two sisters, and their significant others, on a short cruise. My girlfriend said that that idea made her feel a little uncomfortable (we handle our finances very equitably and she doesn’t like feeling indebted). So, I’m here looking for ideas.
What not-overly-sensible but non-overly-ridiculous ideas does $3400 buy?
This means, in most cases, if I cast Lightning Strike, I can add the 2 damage to 3 via Pyromancer’s Gauntlet and then double that damage to a total of 10 via Dictate of the Twin Gods.
However, if for some reason it was beneficial to me, I could also choose to double the 3 damage from Lightning Strike to 6, and then add 2 to that damage for a total of 8 via Pyromancer’s Gauntlet.
This literally has almost no influence over the price of Magic Cards… particularly eternal format staples.
Since Magic was released in 1993 the cumulative rate of inflation is 63.5% (http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/). A $2.45 booster in 1993 is worth $4.01 now. Good luck trying to find someone willing to sell an Alpha, Beta, or Revised booster for $4.01. Those boosters are obscenely priced because they are extremely difficult to come by and contain the potential for extremely rare cards.
Another analysis is the price of the card Desecration Demon. In early 2013 its median price was between $1.53 and $2.79. Then, something weird happened in August 2013 when its price began to spike as high as $11.69 in October 2013. Its price then steadily declined until it settled at about $4.51 today.
The 1.4% 2013 inflation rate should put that $1.53 price at about $1.55. But it isn’t. What factor could possibly inflate that price?
Lets look at another card; Thragtusk. In early 2013 its median price was about $13.18. Its price declined steadily until about October 2013 when it tanked to about $3.50. It’s price continues to decline today.
What factor could possibly account for a cards price diminishing despite the inflation rate?
Inflation and Fed policy has about as much impact on the cost of Magic cards as the price of tea in China.
I believe there will eventually be a new format based on the new card design for numerous reasons that are not necessarily on topic. Card price in relation to eternal formats is only one aspect upon which I base my prediction. I believe that many exceptionally powerful cards and card combinations within eternal formats are viewed as “mistakes” by Wizards. I believe that there is little interest in Wizards to “retrofit” eternal formats whenever a new “mistake” crops up. Legacy/Vintage was Magic 1.0. Modern was Magic 2.0. The new card border is Wizards understanding that there will be a need for a Magic 3.0 and way to communicate to new players what cards can be played within Magic 3.0.
I suspect Modern Masters was a “band aid” solution to the issue of card availability within Modern. I also believe that the result of Modern Masters was proof that, despite “band aids” prices will continue to rise and the long-term financial sustainability of current eternal formats is untenable. Wizards focus will be on supporting Magic 3.0 in the future. It’s a software business model that is quite popular. Wizards just figured out a way to do it with physical objects.
I don’t really see why this prediction is so outlandish.