First, our current thread title doesn't really fall into your criteria. Second, we opted out of using [Izzet = Is It] puns a long time ago, april fools jokes aside.
Also, Mmm Babies.
Okay fine, I can agree with that. No Izzet puns.
Also, I don't think I was around at the time when you guys were voting for that new title or was unaware of it.
Quote from rocker05 »
If people started calling Ravus that, he would likely find you in the real world and kick your ass. Generally, we handle things on a case-by-case basis rather than enacting hard-and-fast constitutional rules. See the precedent that was set by the whole demoting Niv thing.
The way we choose new thread titles? Whatever people like the most is what we use.
But what about the Izzet League? I mean, strictly saying, shouldn't there be something that should adhere to what the actual flavor of the Izzet League is doing?
I am not saying that we disband a whole democratic system completely--reread what I said. A lot of non-Izzet things can be tolerated, but what I am saying is that, for a clan like ourselves, there ought to be certain things that we should keep in relationship to the guild we refer to that shouldn't be compromised.
For example:
Say that I made a clan about Ipods
When the clan first started, every member had an Ipod and every member was talking about everything related to Ipods.
Then, at a certain point, everyone no longer owned an Ipod.
Then no one talked about Ipods.
The no one was talking about anything related to Ipods at all.
And then everyone started talking about eating. At this point, could we really say that this is a clan about Ipods or a clan about dietary habits?
For the flexibility of the clan to get away with a lot of the non-Izzet-flavored things that we do, I suggest that we should at least have our titles be flavorfully referential to the Izzet guild. I think that if we had clan members do anything else that would be Izzet-flavor-related (i.e. the kind of decks that ought to be reviewed, the kind of posts that should be made, etc.) then the whole matter would be oppressive.
Also, Ivaldi... (and Ravus) - the Izzet aren't oliogarchists; we're meritocratists. true, we don't care so much about everyone having a voice as much as the best idea winning out. but the best way to do this is to use democracy with bullying. let everone have a voice.
Just make sure the smart people are shouting.
And who determines who is worthy of merit? Who determines what ideas are good and what we ought not to consider? Personally, there must be something objective that we could refer to and defend with which is why I say that a "constitution" be enacted upon. And I didn't even mean a literal physical constitution, but rather a rule or a guideline to follow that would force certain decisions to adhere themselves strictly to the interests of the what the clan represents--the Izzet League--and not prioritizing that below the interests of individuals and groups.
Quote from wamyc »
So I was going to blast Ivaldi for having an opinion above his station, but stalted and overly-technical language aside, he's right to express himself, and we're right to tell him to shut up. That's how the best idea wins.
How was saying that no less different than telling me to stfu and that what I was saying was dumb? I feel hurt.:(
And seriously, I didn't give an opinion that was "above my station," but rather acted upon a certain set of beliefs and expectations that I had with this clan. I am neither looking down on anyone nor am I seeking out to try to override the vote and voice of others. Regardless if the clan actually followed my beliefs or met with them, I wanted to voice out my objection solely on the premise of what this clan is supposed to represent--The Izzet. It is not the case that I find something wrong with what anyone else is doing or with what everyone else is saying, but rather what I see is something that really, heavily, compromises the representation of the Izzet guild. If a title does not flavorfully represent the Izzet guild, what do we do does represent the Izzet guild?
Ivaldi, don't take things so personally. We're discussing a thread title on the internet. And my statement was not - {ur dum, stfu.} It was - {you're being overly vocal about something that other people are just voting on because that's how we do things; however I realize that this speaking up noisily thing is an Izzet way of doing things as well.}
Also, people aren't the things that get merit here - it's the ideas that we want to merit or demerit. Frankly, the Izzet way is to get at the best solution through exactly this: not to stick to a constitution or strong guidelines, but rather to hash it out, which is what was happening.
I don't think we're in need of a purification to Izzet ideals. I think we manage quite well to be an Izzety Clan just as is.
We all remember our first card, our first booster, and (most importantly) our first deck. That feeling of putting together a haphazardly (or maybe not) bunch of cards we felt had potential. Seeing that deck come together was probably the hook that got of us into Magic. It was a gateway to card design, drafts, and tournaments.
The fact many of us still are dedicated to the game and community around it is a monument to our endurance.
~~~
Clan Contest #2: ENDURANCE is the segue between the Survivor Contest, and the later Clan Contest #3: Name TBD (A Deck Auction followed by Tournament).
Clan Contest #2 is open to everyone, while CC#3 will sadly be limited to those clans that participated in Endurance.
This is how the contest works:
-Each Clan that participated in SURVIVOR will recieve one of the original set at random (It'll not be the same card they submitted however.)
-After recieving the card, the Clans will have two weeks to make a Extended Legal 60 Card Deck with a 15 Card Sideboard, following the Banning & Restriction list
-The Deck must be original (Any deck that shares approximately 40% of nonland cards with a net deck will be disqualifed)
-The Deck must be based around the card (By either supporting it, or being in theme)
-At the end of the first week, each participating clan must give an update in the from of a short paragraph describing the intent of the deck (not necessarily the final idea) to ensure that the deck won't be built at the last moment by one member
-Deck Building must be collaborative between Clan mates
-Helping others build decks is allowed and recommended
-Sabtogaing, self evidently, is not and bases for DQ from the contest
IMPORTANT NOTE: Because the deck building is a community process, do not hate on a particular deck being built.
After that's done we have
-After the two weeks, judgings will take place in three parts
-Clan Popularity: Each of the participating clans votes on one particular, deck not their own, on ANY criteria. Each vote is equal to 1 point.
-Thematics: A contigent of representives from all participating Clans, will discuss and order the deck by how well they follow the centric card. Some number of points for first, second, etc.
-Tourney Viability: The same reps along with an Extended laison, will aid in order the decks in terms of competiveness (setting it up for Clan Contest #3)
-Points are added the winner is determined
~~~
Sign Ups Start Now
(No additional information is required other than interest. Cards will be assigned when registration ends)
All Clans Interested Must Register By April 17.
Does anyone else dislike the 40% rule? It seems incredibly lame that whoever gets Cloudkey and Bob is kinda sol when building a deck.
Also, Ivaldi... (and Ravus) - the Izzet aren't oliogarchists; we're meritocratists. true, we don't care so much about everyone having a voice as much as the best idea winning out. but the best way to do this is to use democracy with bullying. let everone have a voice.
Just make sure the smart people are shouting.
Does anyone else dislike the 40% rule? It seems incredibly lame that whoever gets Cloudkey and Bob is kinda sol when building a deck.
While I think a good, original deck with Bob can be built, I find the number chosen (40%) to be pretty low. It's going to be hard to replace a lot of the staples in Extended. At any rate, I hope we get one of the more powerful cards (like...Bob).
Ivaldi, don't take things so personally. We're discussing a thread title on the internet. And my statement was not - {ur dum, stfu.} It was - {you're being overly vocal about something that other people are just voting on because that's how we do things; however I realize that this speaking up noisily thing is an Izzet way of doing things as well.}
Was I even being overly vocal though?
I can understand if you think that I might sound like that, but I was only matter-of-factly trying to be clear and deductive as to what I saw was wrong and avoiding to have my words misinterpreted in other ways.
Quote from wamyc »
Also, people aren't the things that get merit here - it's the ideas that we want to merit or demerit. Frankly, the Izzet way is to get at the best solution through exactly this: not to stick to a constitution or strong guidelines, but rather to hash it out, which is what was happening.
But that still doesn't resolve the issue here does it?
For example, back to what I said about the clan of Ipod lovers:
Suppose the clan members were to devise a title for their new thread. At this point, the Ipod lovers have now stopped loving their Ipods, but still maintain their discussions on subjects related to the Ipod (i.e., music, movies, and etc.). Suppose then that when they "hatch" new ideas, they get the following:
[Ipod] sucks
[Ipod] is s***, buy a Zune
I have porn on my [Ipod]
[Ipod] by Apple
Say then that the members democratically voted for what was worthy of "merit" for a title and they chose the second one. Would you, wamyc, believe that is appropriate?
Necessarily, when an idea gets evaluated on some merit of it being good or not, it is already being judged by a sense of constitution and guideline. Take, for example, the US Constitution. When a law or an executive order is passed, that law or order can be questioned and brought to court and, if it works itself well enogh, can land on the footsteps of the Supreme Court where that very "idea" (that law or order) becomes scrutinized and evaluated for its constitutional merit.
Mark Rosewater himself even defended such an idea of a mechanical guideline for the Izzet when he wrote about their "Replicate" ability:
Quote from Mark Rosewater »
For each two-color article, I examine a topic near and dear to the guild in question. For Red/Blue I thought I would look at the concern that the mechanics chosen for the Izzet in Guildpact don't reflect the values put forth about Red/Blue. For example, I keep explaining that Red/Blue is all about doing something different and unique yet so much of Red/Blue in Guildpact (with things such as replicate and all the “fork” effects) seems to be about copying things - the antithesis of being unique.
The answer to this is a complex one, but then, I've never shied away from complex answers. In design, there is a big difference between what a spell does in isolation and how it intermingles in the larger picture. Copy spells might seem very unoriginal when looked up close, but when you take a few steps back, you'll see they look very different.
To understand my point, I need to first explain an aspect of design known as variance. Variance talks about how much variety a spell has long term, that is, during the course of many games. For example, let's take Concentrate (“Draw three cards.”). Concentrate has zero variance. Every time you play the spell, the exact same thing will happen. You, the player playing the spell, will always draw three cards. Now let's examine Shock (“Shock deals 2 damage to target creature or player.”). Shock has a slightly higher variance, as it is modal. That is, the caster has two choices of effects. Sometimes the Shock will deal its damage to a creature and sometimes it will deal damage to a player. In addition, as each game tends to have different creatures played, what the Shock gets used on, provided it's being used on a creature, will also have a high variance.
Now, let's go to the other end of the spectrum with a card like a copy spell. A copy spell has so many different options in how it can be played, that it has the ability to be played in a unique way for numerous games. It has a high variance. Why is this important? Because when we sat down to design the Izzet, the designers wanted to create an overall feel that captured the Izzet's desire to constantly do different things. The catch is the fact that the Izzet gets no more cards than any other guild. The constant change we wanted for the Izzet could not be represented by the card pool alone. Thus, to capture this effect, the designers latched on to creating cards for the Izzet that had a high variance. This way, when someone plays the Izzet, the effect of the Izzet always doing different things is achieved over time. By doing this, we made the Izzet experience the least repetitive of any of the guilds.
And that is why the Izzet cards in Guildpact were designed that way.
It is not the case then that rules always can bind creativity. In fact, I believe, rules can define creativity. As Rosewater explained with the "Replicate" ability, a certain definition of an ability, or rule, allowed for multiple variables and possibilities to occur. Take a look at the Short-Story Competitions in the Personal Writing section on this forum and you'll see how restrictions encourage the best of ideas. What I'm asking for a constitution is to not say "No this, no that, and none of this" so that there could only be one possibility. Rather I am asking for a constitution that can exist so that absurdities like
[The Izzet] worships [The Called]
Or
Members of Justice and Peace, we are [The Izzet]
Otherwise, the interests of the Clan itself would only be dependent on the opinion of the majority of the members or the ideas of those who are skilled in being persuasive.
And you may say, "when will there ever be a case where that could go all wrong?"
My suggestion does not invoke the sense that, if we don't do this, this will happen. I repeat, my suggestion does not intend to invoke that notion. Rather what it does intend to invoke is that, currently, our system is slightly flawed and, in order to improve it, we ought to add modifications to it so that we could avoid the possibility of such a problem for the clan's own future interests.
Quote from wamyc »
I don't think we're in need of a purification to Izzet ideals. I think we manage quite well to be an Izzety Clan just as is.
I didn't say that we needed a purification of who we are. All I said was we needed something to maintain the identity of The Izzet. We could be talking about everything they talk about in [The Called], [Soundtrack], [Pack], [Dragons], and etc. But so long as we maintain one consistent shred of Izzet-ness, I think that would be sufficient enough as to not compromise or contradict the identity of the Clan.
Also, what I'm talking about is not now, but rather later. Now, we're quite well as an Izzety clan (whatever that may be), but we ought to consider about the later part.
Time Manipulation Device Mark Three: Hour Glass Reversal
Idea was found looking into the past useing the time turner to go to egypt. After study have made improvments to device and are ready for testing. Waiting for Slaker to come back to throw him through it. I hope he turns out better then the elf i captured.
Decks UR Delver UB Dredge WB Tokens UR Moderns Storm
It wouldn't be a deckbuilding contest if you didn't build a deck, and copying part of a netdeck is not building a deck. I think 40% is generous.
It seems like anyone copying a netdeck would be pretty apparent in their entry (like if Bob got Domain Zoo). I don't think the rule is really necessary to encourage creativity.
While I think a good, original deck with Bob can be built, I find the number chosen (40%) to be pretty low. It's going to be hard to replace a lot of the staples in Extended. At any rate, I hope we get one of the more powerful cards (like...Bob).
I hope we get a good one too. Bob would be nice, and I'm sure we could build some janky Zur enchantment deck. If we get Baloth we could build tribal beasts, and Glimpse lets us play dredge or some silly mill deck.
glipse gives us a kool merfolk mill deck with lots of potential. Tribal Beast would be fun and well ive always liked Zur decks Godsire would be easy too i feel. as for how competitive who knows.
Wamyc: did u sign us up alrdy? cause i think the general concensous is we r in
Edit: As an esper player love the new Sphinx what you all think? and doesnt it look like a new Akroma almost? at least ability wise
Time Manipulation Device Mark Three: Hour Glass Reversal
Idea was found looking into the past useing the time turner to go to egypt. After study have made improvments to device and are ready for testing. Waiting for Slaker to come back to throw him through it. I hope he turns out better then the elf i captured.
Decks UR Delver UB Dredge WB Tokens UR Moderns Storm
sir i must say u read my mind on that one. now to get 3 more Transmuters or better yet another Sharuum and a discard ability. hmmmm this is going to be fun. Esper needed a good late game finisher
Time Manipulation Device Mark Three: Hour Glass Reversal
Idea was found looking into the past useing the time turner to go to egypt. After study have made improvments to device and are ready for testing. Waiting for Slaker to come back to throw him through it. I hope he turns out better then the elf i captured.
Decks UR Delver UB Dredge WB Tokens UR Moderns Storm
Didn't AI said we would've voted for this title:
"[The Izzet]: Red and blue, what does it make? PURPLE RAIN!"
Okay fine, I can agree with that. No Izzet puns.
Also, I don't think I was around at the time when you guys were voting for that new title or was unaware of it.
But what about the Izzet League? I mean, strictly saying, shouldn't there be something that should adhere to what the actual flavor of the Izzet League is doing?
I am not saying that we disband a whole democratic system completely--reread what I said. A lot of non-Izzet things can be tolerated, but what I am saying is that, for a clan like ourselves, there ought to be certain things that we should keep in relationship to the guild we refer to that shouldn't be compromised.
For example:
Say that I made a clan about Ipods
When the clan first started, every member had an Ipod and every member was talking about everything related to Ipods.
Then, at a certain point, everyone no longer owned an Ipod.
Then no one talked about Ipods.
The no one was talking about anything related to Ipods at all.
And then everyone started talking about eating. At this point, could we really say that this is a clan about Ipods or a clan about dietary habits?
For the flexibility of the clan to get away with a lot of the non-Izzet-flavored things that we do, I suggest that we should at least have our titles be flavorfully referential to the Izzet guild. I think that if we had clan members do anything else that would be Izzet-flavor-related (i.e. the kind of decks that ought to be reviewed, the kind of posts that should be made, etc.) then the whole matter would be oppressive.
And who determines who is worthy of merit? Who determines what ideas are good and what we ought not to consider? Personally, there must be something objective that we could refer to and defend with which is why I say that a "constitution" be enacted upon. And I didn't even mean a literal physical constitution, but rather a rule or a guideline to follow that would force certain decisions to adhere themselves strictly to the interests of the what the clan represents--the Izzet League--and not prioritizing that below the interests of individuals and groups.
How was saying that no less different than telling me to stfu and that what I was saying was dumb? I feel hurt.:(
And seriously, I didn't give an opinion that was "above my station," but rather acted upon a certain set of beliefs and expectations that I had with this clan. I am neither looking down on anyone nor am I seeking out to try to override the vote and voice of others. Regardless if the clan actually followed my beliefs or met with them, I wanted to voice out my objection solely on the premise of what this clan is supposed to represent--The Izzet. It is not the case that I find something wrong with what anyone else is doing or with what everyone else is saying, but rather what I see is something that really, heavily, compromises the representation of the Izzet guild. If a title does not flavorfully represent the Izzet guild, what do we do does represent the Izzet guild?
Also, people aren't the things that get merit here - it's the ideas that we want to merit or demerit. Frankly, the Izzet way is to get at the best solution through exactly this: not to stick to a constitution or strong guidelines, but rather to hash it out, which is what was happening.
I don't think we're in need of a purification to Izzet ideals. I think we manage quite well to be an Izzety Clan just as is.
And my milkshake is gone.
Credit for my sig banner goes to my friend Raptor. <3
Does anyone else dislike the 40% rule? It seems incredibly lame that whoever gets Cloudkey and Bob is kinda sol when building a deck.
The Izzet
Sales Thread
wamyc knows what he's talking about.
While I think a good, original deck with Bob can be built, I find the number chosen (40%) to be pretty low. It's going to be hard to replace a lot of the staples in Extended. At any rate, I hope we get one of the more powerful cards (like...Bob).
Was I even being overly vocal though?
I can understand if you think that I might sound like that, but I was only matter-of-factly trying to be clear and deductive as to what I saw was wrong and avoiding to have my words misinterpreted in other ways.
But that still doesn't resolve the issue here does it?
For example, back to what I said about the clan of Ipod lovers:
Suppose the clan members were to devise a title for their new thread. At this point, the Ipod lovers have now stopped loving their Ipods, but still maintain their discussions on subjects related to the Ipod (i.e., music, movies, and etc.). Suppose then that when they "hatch" new ideas, they get the following:
[Ipod] sucks
[Ipod] is s***, buy a Zune
I have porn on my [Ipod]
[Ipod] by Apple
Say then that the members democratically voted for what was worthy of "merit" for a title and they chose the second one. Would you, wamyc, believe that is appropriate?
Necessarily, when an idea gets evaluated on some merit of it being good or not, it is already being judged by a sense of constitution and guideline. Take, for example, the US Constitution. When a law or an executive order is passed, that law or order can be questioned and brought to court and, if it works itself well enogh, can land on the footsteps of the Supreme Court where that very "idea" (that law or order) becomes scrutinized and evaluated for its constitutional merit.
Mark Rosewater himself even defended such an idea of a mechanical guideline for the Izzet when he wrote about their "Replicate" ability:
It is not the case then that rules always can bind creativity. In fact, I believe, rules can define creativity. As Rosewater explained with the "Replicate" ability, a certain definition of an ability, or rule, allowed for multiple variables and possibilities to occur. Take a look at the Short-Story Competitions in the Personal Writing section on this forum and you'll see how restrictions encourage the best of ideas. What I'm asking for a constitution is to not say "No this, no that, and none of this" so that there could only be one possibility. Rather I am asking for a constitution that can exist so that absurdities like
[The Izzet] worships [The Called]
Or
Members of Justice and Peace, we are [The Izzet]
Otherwise, the interests of the Clan itself would only be dependent on the opinion of the majority of the members or the ideas of those who are skilled in being persuasive.
And you may say, "when will there ever be a case where that could go all wrong?"
My suggestion does not invoke the sense that, if we don't do this, this will happen. I repeat, my suggestion does not intend to invoke that notion. Rather what it does intend to invoke is that, currently, our system is slightly flawed and, in order to improve it, we ought to add modifications to it so that we could avoid the possibility of such a problem for the clan's own future interests.
I didn't say that we needed a purification of who we are. All I said was we needed something to maintain the identity of The Izzet. We could be talking about everything they talk about in [The Called], [Soundtrack], [Pack], [Dragons], and etc. But so long as we maintain one consistent shred of Izzet-ness, I think that would be sufficient enough as to not compromise or contradict the identity of the Clan.
Also, what I'm talking about is not now, but rather later. Now, we're quite well as an Izzety clan (whatever that may be), but we ought to consider about the later part.
DF: yeah baby stuff makes sence on being on the mind and understandable i wont holdnit against ya.
CC: sounds like we got some fun coming our way. does any one have a list of sets legal in extended to help ppl like me who dont play extended.
High Mage of Time Manipulation in the IzzetLeague
Time Manipulation Device Mark Three: Hour Glass Reversal
Idea was found looking into the past useing the time turner to go to egypt. After study have made improvments to device and are ready for testing. Waiting for Slaker to come back to throw him through it. I hope he turns out better then the elf i captured.
Decks
UR Delver
UB Dredge
WB Tokens
UR Moderns Storm
It seems like anyone copying a netdeck would be pretty apparent in their entry (like if Bob got Domain Zoo). I don't think the rule is really necessary to encourage creativity.
I hope we get a good one too. Bob would be nice, and I'm sure we could build some janky Zur enchantment deck. If we get Baloth we could build tribal beasts, and Glimpse lets us play dredge or some silly mill deck.
The Izzet
Wamyc: did u sign us up alrdy? cause i think the general concensous is we r in
Edit: As an esper player love the new Sphinx what you all think? and doesnt it look like a new Akroma almost? at least ability wise
High Mage of Time Manipulation in the IzzetLeague
Time Manipulation Device Mark Three: Hour Glass Reversal
Idea was found looking into the past useing the time turner to go to egypt. After study have made improvments to device and are ready for testing. Waiting for Slaker to come back to throw him through it. I hope he turns out better then the elf i captured.
Decks
UR Delver
UB Dredge
WB Tokens
UR Moderns Storm
Its alot like Akroma. I really like it actually. I'm a huge fan of the pro red/green, pretty much stopping all Naturalize and Shatter effects at it.
hmmmm.....Master Transmuter. Methinks I have ideas.
High Mage of Time Manipulation in the IzzetLeague
Time Manipulation Device Mark Three: Hour Glass Reversal
Idea was found looking into the past useing the time turner to go to egypt. After study have made improvments to device and are ready for testing. Waiting for Slaker to come back to throw him through it. I hope he turns out better then the elf i captured.
Decks
UR Delver
UB Dredge
WB Tokens
UR Moderns Storm
Sales Thread