It's usually the smelly ones who don't notice it. It also appears that you don't notice sarcasm either. Poor little guy.
TLDR: When you're butthurt about people being butthurt about other people being butthurt, you're just an idiot.
-
- Joban8
- Registered User
-
Member for 8 years, 9 months, and 10 days
Last active Thu, Jun, 8 2023 11:18:21
- 0 Followers
- 950 Total Posts
- 357 Thanks
-
Nov 8, 2015
Joban8 posted a message on The Magic Street Journal: How to Handle "That Guy"Posted in: Articles -
Nov 6, 2015
Joban8 posted a message on The Magic Street Journal: How to Handle "That Guy"Posted in: ArticlesQuote from Klamsmith »This isn't a platform for your victim complex. The article was fine until the phrase "The elephant in the room is women and minorities playing Magic in unwelcoming areas" where your article turns into the great plight facing women in gaming. Three of my good magic friends are homosexual we play magic at three different venues regularly. There are several female regulars we see and play with as well and if someone says something degrading to them they wouldn't hesitate to call them out on it, they don't expect a white knight to save them. The thing is "That Guy" is already reguarded as an a-hole wherever he is. Stereotypes exist thats the cold hard truth it's your job to change that perspective. This article shouldn't be about what I have to do as a player if I see BS I'm calling BS on someone acting like an a-hole. It shouldn't be about what a judge should do or what a store owner should do they already understand what needs to be done. It should be about helping women change that stigma of "just being there for their boyfriend" and "not understanding how to play". My wife plays magic with me as well the only time anyone said anything to her was two years ago when she boomerranged a guys first and second attempt at putting a land into play at fnm. Who just ended up rage quitting and leaving the store after she called him out. So yes magic has a number of "That Guys" who are the internet trolls of real life and the number one rule is don't feed the trolls.
Tldr: Defend yourself from the beta's at the magic shop.
Bravo, my friend. This starting off fairly interesting until it turned into a soap box for political correctness. "That" guy certainly exists, but it's not a given that all ********s are racist/sexist/transphobic/other labels that you're trying to push. Stereotypes exist and they're not going away. I'm a man who's dating a transgender woman, but I don't get butthurt when we play with our group of friends and they crack an off-color joke every now and then. It's called humor and it's a two-way street; she gets in on the banter and gives it right back. I completely understand that when you're playing at an FNM or casual event with new players, these kinds of comments and jokes are uncalled for and simply make you an ********. However, in the comfort of your own playgroup, with people you know, what's the problem? Because chances are that if a player can't take a mild joke then they're not somebody I'd want in my playgroup. Everybody has their own insecurities and joking about them with others is a great way to find acceptance. You want to write a piece about social problems affecting LGSs? Investigate the poor hygiene that's exhibited by, unfortunately, a large number of players; I find that to be a much more influential factor affecting the experiences of new players...unless of course it's rude to stereotype people who suffer from alblutophobia? - To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
IMO, Sylvan Library would be a fine addition to the format, but I could see Shadow being the sole reason why WotC might ultimately decide against it.
Should Sterling Grove grace the format, it would essentially serve the same purpose of preserving our enchantments in addition to providing other utility.
Not so much speculation as it is an inevitability. They launch a new online client that only supports cards in a rotating standard format and those cards can be bought with real world money; once those cards rotate out, WotC isn't going to make an announcement telling Arena players "Well, we forgot to put the whole rotation thing in the tutorial; but fun while it lasted, right?". Partly due to the fact that WotC would rather suffer from Ebola than participate in any form of direct community outreach, but mostly due to the fact that Arena was a planned project and turned out to be a gold mine for WotC + Hasbro shareholders. The need for another format/game function to ensure players don't feel conned come rotation is likely one of the first things WotC considered. It's also likely that solution will be confined to the Arena client only.
Standard is in the best place its been for quite some time and Modern is about to receive the largest single infusion of new cards in the format's history. I'd buy them maybe wanting to try out something like a "Legacy-Lite" were a new format introduced to the paper game, but there's no need for a frontier 2.0 in the paper game. Sure, I'd imagine some players would try it out in paper, but anything of the sort would be created for the sole purpose of maintaining the illusion for some Arena players that their collections aren't completely worthless come rotation time. I'm pretty computer savvy when it comes to hardware and building machines, but I don't know the first thing about programming; if it's feasible for WotC to realistically port over older cards/formats into Arena one day then maybe they'll put some thought into it, but I wouldn't be surprised if they just rip Hearthstone, call it "Wild", and figure it out as they go.
Very excited for Horizons spoilers to start flowing in. If WotC did it right, the Modern metagame will look very different in the coming months. The fetchland spikes have settled for now, but unless Horizons introduces a new land cycle that somehow devalues them, I'm expecting that both allied and enemy fetches will surpass their all-time highs before the end of the Summer.
IMO the vast majority of the set's Modern potential comes from the uncommon slot; I think many of the static ability walkers will find homes in the format (namely Ashiok, Saheeli, Kiora, Davriel) and while their rarity doesn't make for good specs, I think it'd be wise to pick up some cheap foils once more product is opened and when/if prices settle down to a reasonable point. I think Karn, Ral, & Chandra are some to keep an eye on from the rare slot. Lastly, I think it'll be interesting to see what happens to Tezzeret, master of the bridge; a 6 cmc walker is rough, but if I learned anything from playing during Mirrodin/Darksteel it's that affinity for artifacts can and will be abused if logistically possible; seeing how WotC continues to insist on including promo-only cards in Standard sets, Tezz might be the only card I'd seriously consider speccing on if/when copies can be had for a reasonable price.
Agreed. Lest we not forget Dominaria Karn was once thought to be the next big thing from a standard set, commanding $50+/copy over the 3-4 mo following the sets release. IMO WAR Karn has a better chance of making an actual impact in the format/market, however, we still need to remember it's a rare in a highly popular standard set. I don't think it's ever worth it in the long run paying more than $30 for a Standard card while in rotation if you don't intend to use it for actually playing Standard. But that's just me; I can it potentially reaching that mark for a brief period before the market is saturated with opened product. I'd definitely expect it to hit that mark if it were a mythic, so I'd jump on them before vendors take notice and de-list/re-list +30%.
IMO Arclight is a solid card to reference whenever gauging the worth of anything within a current Standard rotation; mythic from a popular std set that followed another popular std set (never thought I'd say that about the format ever again) and quickly ascended to T1 across multiple formats, yet its ceiling was still +/- $30 until the challenger reprint. Similarly, fetches represent solid data points when looking at long-term value for anything in a popular/widely opened set. It's been what, 5 years since KTK and we just recently started to see significant movement? I think they're a steal right now at $10, but just a quarterly reminder about tempering standard expectations lol.
It's a great card but I think it would still be too slow as a tutor. The Shroud effect could be interesting though, but I am not sure how much it is really needed.
I hope that they put a Steelshaper's Gift in Modern Horizons that searches for an Aura instead of an Equipment card.
An aura-centric Steelshaper's would be excellent and seemingly much more likely than Enlightened Tutor entering Modern.
I think we'd benefit from almost any sort of efficient card advantage/filtering and/or tutor effect. I still think Sylvan Library would be a fair addition to the format and give us some filtering/painful CA while juicing up Ethereal; with the exception of DS decks moving into green, I don't see many ways it could end up being degenerative. I definitely agree with Grove being a slow tutor, but I think there's potential there if we can take advantage of shrouding our enchantments. There could be some utility in running it out of the SB either alone or with some kind of misc non-aura enchantment package (e.g. Suppression Field, Ghostly Prison) to slow down/turn off any enchant hate by tutoring up another copy in response to removal. I suppose it would allow us to drop a Daybreak with only 1 other aura attached without needing to worry as much about losing both to a removal spell. Might not ultimately pan out, but thinking back to when Open the Armory was printed and desperately trying make it work, I'd definitely like to give it a whirl if it should enter the format.
-----------------
"If you are willing to mulligan into oblivion, then you were only 86.5% to find a Leyline under the Vancouver mulligan rule, with an average starting hand of 5.22 cards. Under the London mulligan rule, you’re 97.2% to find a Leyline, with an average starting hand of 5.55 cards. Another way to put it: the odds of missing seven hands in a row with the Vancouver mulligan is 13.5%, but the odds of missing seven hands in a row with the London mulligan is only 2.8%. That’s a huge difference".
"Consider the following model of a combo deck:
20 lands
8 copies of combo piece A
8 copies of combo piece B
24 other spells
Lots of Modern decks can be modeled in this way. For example:
In Bogles, combo piece A could be a hexproof creature (Slippery Bogle or Gladecover Scout), and combo piece B could be one of the best Auras (Ethereal Armor or Daybreak Coronet). The specifics of the deck don’t really matter, but the mulligan strategy does. I assume that we keep if and only if our hand contains at least one of each combo piece and at least two lands. This is what I define as a good opening hand.
If you use this mulligan strategy but keep any four card hand, then you would keep 5.08 cards on average under the Vancouver rule, compared to 5.32 cards on average under the London rule.
So under the London rule, you will be able to sculpt a perfect opening hand (i.e., a hand with one of each combo piece and at least two lands) substantially more often, and you end up with larger hands on average. If you mulligan aggressively, you’re 70.46% to end up with such a perfect opening hand".
"Under either mulligan rule, you have a 39.9% to find at least one of your four Leylines in your starting seven. But if you are willing to mulligan down to a certain number of cards, then the odds of finding a Leyline go up dramatically"
---------------------
Obviously as a deck that often lives/dies on mulligans, Bogles would instantly benefit from the London mull as the chance of us finding just a functional opening hand increases dramatically. In our particular situation, the new mull would afford the opportunity for some selectivity in addition to the inherent increased consistency. After game 1, arguably all decks benefit from the London mull assuming effective SB answers are in place. However, it would seem as though the rule would lean in our favor (as well as any other deck where finding their particular leyline G2/G3 can make a significant difference) more so than others. Similarly, as a deck that can be crippled by T1 Thoughtseize, the chance to find an opening hand with redundancy G2/G3 can make a significant difference when we're on the draw.
Something that wasn't specifically touched on in the article was how/if the London mull would affect the construction of SBs. Theoretically, a greater chance to find our hate cards would suggest the possibility of running less copies of X in favor of including one copy of Y in order to cover more bases. However in regards to Bogles specifically, I'm curious if it'd be wiser to stick to the typical SB plan and enjoy the increased probability of finding something ran as a 4-of or potentially trimming down the SB in order to accommodate a wider variety of options? Overall, I'm really looking forward to seeing how this plays out should WotC officially declare the London mull law in the paper world, but also a bit worried that problematic cards such as Serum Powder or Leylines could be axed from the format in order to accommodate the change. Interested to hear what yall think about how the the London mull could benefit/harm our overall gameplan/place in the meta.
Ah, bummer it's a targeted offer; thought I'd go and do the same.