2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • 1

    posted a message on [MH2] Mothership 5/25— Garth One-Eye and Deep Forest Hermit
    Quote from Courier7 »
    Somewhere out there, at some point, someone will actually use their real paper Black Lotus after activating Garth's ability just for the effect it will have on everyone nearby.


    The effect of "someone's gonna ambush that guy in the parking lot later."
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 1

    posted a message on [MH2] King Kona -- Kitchen Imp
    WotC pretending like aspic can get nastier than it already is. Joke's on them.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 1

    posted a message on [MH2] Break Ties, Late to Dinner, Spreading Insurrection, Lucid Dreams, and Tourach's Canticle— The Vorthos Cast previews
    Quote from Nutrun »

    There is still a chance to see Hymn to Tourach printed in this set?


    No, but the chances of seeing Tourach himself just went up measurably.

    So, mono white gets more full on reanimation as an in-color effect. I dig it.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 1

    posted a message on [AFR] lolth, Spider queen (planeswalker card), Bruenor, battehammer, and Drizzet, Do’Urden — D&D YouTube channel
    I don't think the payoff is there for an aristocrat deck, honestly.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 1

    posted a message on Maro’s Modern Horizon 2 Teaser
    Quote from Lectrys »
    Quote from fleshrum »
    the clue is "name on a powerful card" not "name in the name of a powerful card"

    Unless we have flavour text as iconic as Ghostfire's, Lhurgoyf's, or the Scars block printing of Mindslaver's, I don't think having your name in the flavour text of a card counts as having your name on a card. Flavour text is way too easily omitted and changed, especially in this era when spotlight printings often cannot fit flavour text in (e.g. the latest printing of Lotus Cobra).


    Having a name in the flavor text is exactly the kind of oblique reference I would expect from these hints.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 1

    posted a message on New Secret Lair Info: Strixhaven and Band Posters
    I have it on good authority there were originally 15 commandments, but one of the tablets got dropped.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 1

    posted a message on D&D forgotten realm confirmed to get commander decks
    Quote from ZasZ234 »

    Well, it's certainly easier to argue about issues that arise "if I asked" than actually asking.


    Sure. Why give someone with a penchant for making up arbitrary definitions the opportunity to do more of the same, though? That's just creating unnecessary work for myself in the long run, and doesn't actually add anything to the conversation.

    Quote from ZasZ234 »
    I think it's a particularly ungenerous interpretation to say they are "worried about lands" (as opposed to "taking them into account for total deck size"), but even then... Nykthos!


    I don't. One of the tricks to, erm, reading comprehension is being able to size up a writer's biases. I find it difficult to believe the person has much experience with commander, given their stance on the format and how they've framed their argument. Why, then, should I assume they're not including lands to prove a point when you yourself had to completely twist that same argument on its head to make it sound even remotely plausible? Like I said, it just doesn't square, especially within the broader context of what's actually being asked for here. 90 cards was a poor point of reference if we aren't talking about a single commander deck, and an even poorer one if we are. The fact that I chose to approach it from both angles, across multiple posts, is amply generous so far as I'm concerned.

    Quote from ZasZ234 »
    You make certainly some ungenerous assumptions yourself with regard to the numbers. How good-faith can your argument be, if you are clearly aware of how many lands are going to be in those decks (many of which will be basic lands), yet you state
    Quote from FlossedBeaver »
    if we use your numbers, just 2 decks would be 180 cards out of less than 300 for an entire set.

    as if those are 180 unique cardnames (because that's what the "less than 300" refers to, right?)? And how can you use a pool of "less than 300" cards (so even ignoring that "plane neutral" could include cards like Fireball if not reprinted in the set) if you also point out ~80 commander-deck-specific cards (81, one of them IIRC appearing in all decks) that were created for the setting beyond the draft booster cards.


    We're not using my numbers, we're using theirs. The point, which I feel you missed, is that the argument doesn't stand up to close scrutiny, either by normal metrics (x/65) or the ones I've been given (90/99). Extending the sample size into multiple decks only makes it worse, not better. If you care to offer up better metrics in defense of someone else's argument, I'm all ears.

    To be perfectly honest, I'm not even sure why 90 was used to begin with, since it doesn't serve the original point about theme or intro decks. If they meant 90% instead, they already had an opportunity to clarify.

    Quote from ZasZ234 »
    You may complain about "generous assumptions", but here is why I make them: If someone's position is indefensible under generous assumptions, it is refuted. If you have to interpret statements in the worst possible way and fudge the numbers, if you weren't even interested enough to know where the goalposts were, then you maybe aren't actually making a good faith effort to understand the position enough to maybe agree with it. Not defining a goal post gives you as much leeway to move them around as the other side.


    I sense that maybe we're talking past each other; I'm the one being forced to make generous assumptions here, so that we (zeta and I) can share a debate on the same level as one another. Complaining really doesn't enter into it. Here is why, in good faith, I chose to make such assumptions: if someone's argument is so deliberately nebulous that they can't be pinned down in objective, measurable terms, there is nothing defensible to refute in the first place. It feels as though the alternatives I'm left with are to dismiss the conversation out of hand, or make somebody else's points for them.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 2

    posted a message on D&D forgotten realm confirmed to get commander decks
    Quote from signofzeta »
    If you want to play Commander, the person you want to play with would immediately know you want to play Commander if you said "Do you want to play Magic the Gathering" Does that happen? No.

    Ask anyone to teach you MTG. They will not teach you how to play Commander unless you specifically told them you wanted to learn Commander.


    The only answer to the question "Do you want to play Magic?" should be "What format?", because there is no default version of the game that everyone defers to. On those occasions that I've played Magic in a public space, people have come up to ask if I was playing Magic - they didn't think to specify whether it was "regular," commander, or anything else. Incidentally, we were playing commander, and we didn't bother to correct the question by responding "no, we're not playing Magic, we're playing commander." Not all Magic needs to be commander for all Commander to be Magic.

    I agree that commander should not be the first format taught to a given person; having recently taught a friend how to play, I laid out all the options available first, because again, there is no default version of the game - just personal preference. The reason why I wouldn't teach commander first has absolutely nothing to do with any of the reasons you've given. Commander is a difficult first format to learn because of a) the sheer breadth of cards available, and b) the number of separate interactions to track across several players in a multiplayer game. Both of those things still fall under the limited description you keep giving us of "regular Magic."

    There's definitely a kind of Magic that isn't regular, and it's silver border.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 1

    posted a message on D&D forgotten realm confirmed to get commander decks
    Quote from ZasZ234 »

    Isn't the "breadth of cards available across the entirety of Magic's history" comparable to Vintage or Legacy, though? I never bothered checking out the relative size of ban lists. I just think that a "format" is also another axis, another decorator you can add to a variant e. g. the 60-card Constructed variant can be played in different formats like Modern and Core Set 2021-Standard. Shrugs


    Yes, that was very much my point. EDH uses all the same "regular rules" of Magic, but functions predominantly as an alternate format. Personally, I don't like the phraseology of "regular"; it implies that anything outside of a specific person's subjective tastes is irregular, abnormal, unintentional, or otherwise part of an outgroup. It's a puritanical and, frankly, entitled way of perceiving the game.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 1

    posted a message on [C21] Witherbloom Witchcraft— LoadingReadyRun preview
    Isn't part of the charm of Magic arguing over how the made-up names are pronounced? :p
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.