6/28/2010 Feature: "Magic 2011 Has Big Shoes to Fill"

54 posts / 0 new
Last post
This thread is for discussion of this week's Feature Article, which goes live Monday morning on magicthegathering.com.
I don't regret all the Runeclaw Bear and Essence Scatter "renaming" we did in Magic 2010—each was the correct decision for the game individually.



You're still wrong about this.  Both of those new names are completely generic while the old names were descriptive, had a long history behind them, and had many copies in print that that were no longer standard playable due to the change (actually somewhat relevant with Remove Soul).  Mind Control was the worst offender, going from a flavorful name (Persuasion) to an utterly generic, sci-fi sounding name.
Hi Aaron,

Did you ever consider just removing the whole conga line combat damage system, and just having "assign damage and it happens immediately"?

The new deatchtouch template is cleaner, but is still convoluted by having to comply with the conga line. I'd seen the new deatchtouch wording, but its ability to split damage into single points, and its interaction with trample are a bit odd, and are things I wouldn't have realised without seeing the CR or being told. I'm not sure people will read the reminder text for deathtouch, and play it properly.

Wow, not sure how I feel about Deathtouch Episode III: Revenge of the Tramplers.
So Elves are going to get both Elvish Archdruid and Imperius Perfect (supposedly), and vampires are going to lose Nocturnus and gets Captivating Vampire instead. I thought it hurt simply comparing Captivating vampire with Knight Exemplar, but this is like rubbing salt in the wound.

Grave Titan is interesting, but I think every other titan surpasses him (except maybe red).
I don't regret all the Runeclaw Bear and Essence Scatter "renaming" we did in Magic 2010—each was the correct decision for the game individually.




Mind Control was the worst offender, going from a flavorful name (Persuasion) to an utterly generic, sci-fi sounding name.



Flavorful?

You are jacking a creature's brain. There is nothing persuasive about it.

You and me apparently deviate from what's sci-fi and not.

I am Blue/Black
I am Blue/Black
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I'm both selfish and rational. I'm scheming, secretive and manipulative; I use knowledge as a tool for personal gain, and in turn obtaining more knowledge. At best, I am mysterious and stealthy; at worst, I am distrustful and opportunistic.
I like the change to deathtouch and deathtouch/trample. Makes the M10 rule changes much more elegant without having that corner case with the ordered blockers system. It's easier to learn, makes sense and trample is potentially more powerful.

I like the change to deathtouch and deathtouch/trample. Makes the M10 rule changes much more elegant without having that corner case with the ordered blockers system. It's easier to learn, makes sense and trample is potentially more powerful.

I agree.  It's how the rule should have worked last year (and many of us said so).  I'm glad they've decided to implement it now.

Too bad about all of the old pseudo-Deathtouch effects, which still don't function very well with ordered blockers.

Thanks to everyone who helped with the design of the plane of Golamo in the Great Designer Search 2!
My Decks
These are the decks I have assembled at the moment:
Tournament Decks (4)
Kicker Aggro (Invasion Block) Sunforger/Izzet Guildmage Midrange (Ravnica/Time Spiral/Xth Standard) Dragonstorm Combo (Time Spiral/Lorwyn/Xth Standard) Bant Midrange (Lorwyn/Shards/M10 Standard)
Casual Multiplayer Decks (50)
Angel Resurrection Casual Soul Sisters Sindbad's Adventures with Djinn of Wishes Sphinx-Bone Wand Buyback Morph (No Instants or Sorceries) Cabal Coffers Control Zombie Aggro Hungry, Hungry Greater Gargadon/War Elemental Flashfires/Boil/Ruination - Boom! Call of the Wild Teysa, Orzhov Scion with Twilight Drover, Sun Titan, and Hivestone Slivers Rebels Cairn Wanderer Knights Only Gold and () Spells Captain Sisay Toolbox Spellweaver Helix Combo Merfolk Wizards Izzet Guildmage/The Unspeakable Arcane Combo Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind and his Wizards Creatureless Wild Research/Reins of Power Madness Creatureless Pyromancer Ascension Anarchist Living Death Anvil of Bogardan Madness Shamen with Goblin Game/Wound Reflection Combo Mass damage Quest for Pure Flame Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle/Clear the Land with 40+ Lands Doubling Season Thallids Juniper Order Ranger Graft/Tokens Elf Archer Druids Equilibrium/Aluren Combo Experiment Kraj Combo Reap Combo False Cure/Kavu Predator Combo Savra, Queen of the Golgari Sacrifice/Dredge Elf Warriors Eight-Post Sneak Attack Where Ancients Tread Zur the Enchanter with Opal creatures Tamanoa/Kavu Predator/Collapsing Borders Esper Aggro Mishra, Artificer Prodigy and his Darksteel Reactor Theft and Control Unearth Aggro Soul's Fire Vampires Devour Tokens Phytohydra with Powerstone Minefield Treefolk Friendly? Questing Phelddagrif Slivers Dragon Arch Fun I'm probably forgetting a few...
So Wizards removes Vampire Nocturnus and keeps Baneslayer because it's valuable in most decks? It seems that though they reprinted Lightning Bolt and Baneslayer Angel because they were having so much success in standard. Vampire Nocturus is one of if not the best lord in the game. And having all these great vamp cards in the Zendikar block seems that Vampire Nocturus should be guarenteed a spot in 2011.

Wizards, please reconsider, taking away Vampire Nocturnus is an inevitable decline in Vampire decks. If it is not possible, try to print something that gives Vampires +2/+1 and flying in Lights.


Good work fixing deathtouch and trample!
Anyone think that with the conga line system Deathtouch is too complicated for a core set?  I'm hoping there's a large amount of reminder text on the non-rares, in the style of Regeneration.
It's a pretty safe bet Regeneration isn't in this set.
Jeff Heikkinen DCI Rules Advisor since Dec 25, 2011
Hooray, they've finally decided to make deathtouch mean what it always should have done: "Any damage dealt by this creature is lethal".

What puzzles me and my friends is why it was ever any different to this. Having deathtouchers carry around a little pocket of old rules, like Mistform Wall and Master of Arms, seemed like such an odd decision. This new version is the cleanest conceptually it could be, and surely at least one person must have thought of this version during M10 design; I can't see why it wasn't this way from the start.

And to Pegaweb: I'm surprised to still hear people bashing on the conga line. Your "strategy" claim is the most surprising, as it's opened up interesting decisions by removing the automatic best play to stack-and-sac on Sakura-Tribe Elder etc. Bouncing creatures with damage on the stack was fun among experienced players, but always felt somewhat dirty doing it to new players because it's just not what people expect. The new way is better. 



I still don't like the "conga line" either. It's a small thing, yes.

However, the cure I've proposed is generally agreed by most people who have commented on it to be worse than the disease, so I guess that means it's here to stay.

What did I suggest?

Put combat damage back on the stack, like it was in Sixth Edition. Except that combat damage takes place at interrupt speed.

Yes, bring back the word "interrupt", although now it won't mean what it used to mean (since instants now go on the stack, they're like what interrupts used to be).

Damage prevention spells and effects, regeneration spells and effects, and counterspells would all become interrupts, so that damage prevention and regeneration can be countered. (This is as straightforward as having mana abilities work at "mana source" speed without having that spell type actually around any more. Also, adding the "split second" speed didn't get people excited.)

The usual reaction has been that this is going back to the complexities of the Fifth Edition rules. I think otherwise; I think the simplicity and uniformity of the Sixth Edition rules are retained by this, and adding a new spell speed within that system (as opposed to the non-uniformity and complexity of Fifth Edition rules) actually adds less complexity to the Sixth Edition rules than the Magic: 2010 rules change did.

There; Mogg Fanatic stays vitiated, but damage prevention and regeneration can now be done after the fact again, as is also intuitive.

Coming up with weird ideas to make everyone happy since 2008!

 

I have now started a blog as an appropriate place to put my crazy ideas.

Yowsers. Interesting idea. I think I agree it's worse than the disease (especially as I don't think the "disease" is that bad); and I don't think there's any problem with "Prevent the next 4 damage that would be dealt to target creature this turn".

However,  I will agree that regeneration is very confusing to new players. Many many people try to put things into and back out of the graveyard, losing Auras and counters and so on (it's good to see Reassembling Skeleton as a card that does what everyone always seems to thing regeneration did); and even once you understand that doesn't happen, the difference between "when you resolve the ability that sets up the regeneration shield" (the one that goes "Regenerate ~") and "when the creature actually regenerates" is horrendous. And it does come up, even if you're not playing with weird old cards: "so does my creature become tapped now?" I'm frankly astonished the rules handle "Regenerate ~" at all, given that there are cards which say "Regenerate ~. When it regenerates this way": the same verb "regenerate" means two different things that can happen at different times in the turn.
So Wizards removes Vampire Nocturnus and keeps Baneslayer because it's valuable in most decks? It seems that though they reprinted Lightning Bolt and Baneslayer Angel because they were having so much success in standard. Vampire Nocturus is one of if not the best lord in the game. And having all these great vamp cards in the Zendikar block seems that Vampire Nocturus should be guarenteed a spot in 2011.

Wizards, please reconsider, taking away Vampire Nocturnus is an inevitable decline in Vampire decks. If it is not possible, try to print something that gives Vampires +2/+1 and flying in Lights.





Uhh, Vampires are still a new tribe, so they are still being figured out.
I don't think WoTC wants them to be the 'LOLOLOL DROP NOCTURNUS AND WIN' tribe.
They are much better as a controlling tribe, not an aggro one.

And it should be noted that Elves get two lords in M11...just as Soldiers had four in M10.
"Stop *****ing, start brewing" -YoMTGTaps Trying to talk Magic players off ledges since 2001. Sharing my knowledge of rumor history, and how to discuss rumors effectively.
I still don't like the "conga line" either. It's a small thing, yes.

However, the cure I've proposed is generally agreed by most people who have commented on it to be worse than the disease, so I guess that means it's here to stay.

What did I suggest?

Put combat damage back on the stack, like it was in Sixth Edition. Except that combat damage takes place at interrupt speed.

Yes, bring back the word "interrupt", although now it won't mean what it used to mean (since instants now go on the stack, they're like what interrupts used to be).

Damage prevention spells and effects, regeneration spells and effects, and counterspells would all become interrupts, so that damage prevention and regeneration can be countered. (This is as straightforward as having mana abilities work at "mana source" speed without having that spell type actually around any more. Also, adding the "split second" speed didn't get people excited.)

The usual reaction has been that this is going back to the complexities of the Fifth Edition rules. I think otherwise; I think the simplicity and uniformity of the Sixth Edition rules are retained by this, and adding a new spell speed within that system (as opposed to the non-uniformity and complexity of Fifth Edition rules) actually adds less complexity to the Sixth Edition rules than the Magic: 2010 rules change did.

There; Mogg Fanatic stays vitiated, but damage prevention and regeneration can now be done after the fact again, as is also intuitive.









That sure is worse than the disease. The whole point of the DOTS workaround was to deal with multiple blockers while getting rid of the damage prevention window. It was a way to get the Grand Unified Timing System, or whatever it was called, in place. If creatures could only fight one to one, that extra stop would never have existed. People didn't like its removal for different reasons (I don't get to sac and deal damage now). The conga line may not be the best way to deal with that scenario - they have never really done a good job of this in the history of the game - but it creates an outcome that makes sense. The "deathtouch and multiple blockers" thing was the only real problem with it, and it is no longer a problem.

To bring back DOTS and interrupts would make the situation far worse than it was from Sixth-Tenth or pre-Sixth.
So can a creature with only trample deal one damage to a blocker and the rest to the defending player?
You are Red/Blue!
You are Red/Blue!
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what I create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.
So Wizards removes Vampire Nocturnus and keeps Baneslayer because it's valuable in most decks? It seems that though they reprinted Lightning Bolt and Baneslayer Angel because they were having so much success in standard. Vampire Nocturus is one of if not the best lord in the game. And having all these great vamp cards in the Zendikar block seems that Vampire Nocturus should be guarenteed a spot in 2011.

Wizards, please reconsider, taking away Vampire Nocturnus is an inevitable decline in Vampire decks. If it is not possible, try to print something that gives Vampires +2/+1 and flying in Lights.






Uhh, Vampires are still a new tribe, so they are still being figured out.
I don't think WoTC wants them to be the 'LOLOLOL DROP NOCTURNUS AND WIN' tribe.
They are much better as a controlling tribe, not an aggro one.

And it should be noted that Elves get two lords in M11...just as Soldiers had four in M10.



I don't know what you're talking about, but the are much better as an aggro. I don't understand why they would get rid of Nocturnus. It, along side BSA, encouraged people to buy more packs. This was an incredible mistake made by WotC. They better give us a good 4 mana creature that could replace it...
You are Red/Blue!
You are Red/Blue!
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what I create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.
Nice Mythic, even though I liked Crystal Ball more.
OMG click HERE! OMG! How to autocard and use decklist format
--->
For autocarding, write [c][/c] with the name of the card inside it. [c]Island[/c] = Island For linking a card to Gatherer without writting the name of said card for readers, use the autocard brackets together with and equal sign and right the name of the real card. Then put the message you want inside the tags, like you would do with autocarding. Like this: [c=Curse of the Cabal]Captain Never-resolves[/c] = Captain Never-resolves For using the decklist format, follow this: [deck] 4* Terramorphic Expanse 4* Evolving Wilds ... [/deck] It equals:
Real signature, Sblocked for space:
57817638 wrote:
I like storm crow because I really like crows in real life, as an animal, and the card isn't terribly stupid, but packs a good deal of nostalgia and also a chunck of the game's history. So it's perhaps one of the cards I have most affection to, but not because "lol storm crow is bad hurr hurr durr".
Listen to my SoundCloud while you read my signature. The Island, Come And See, The Landlord's Daughter, You'll Not Feel The Drowning - The Decemberists by vimschy IMAGE(http://dragcave.net/image/rkvR.gif)IMAGE(http://dragcave.net/image/L3es.gif) IMAGE(http://dragcave.net/image/m71H.gif)
Quotes
56747598 wrote:
57295478 wrote:
Although I do assume you deliberately refer to them (DCI) as The Grand Imperial Convocation of Evil just for the purposes of making them sound like an ancient and terrible conspiracy.
Now, now. 1994 doesn't quite qualify as "ancient".
56734518 wrote:
Oh, it's a brilliant plan. You see, Bolas was travelling through shadowmoor, causing trouble, when he saw a Wickerbough Elder with its stylin' dead scarecrow hat. Now, Bolas being Bolas took the awesome hat and he put it on his head, but even with all his titanic powers of magic he couldn't make it fit. He grabbed some more scarecrows, but then a little kithkin girl asked if he was trying to build a toupee. "BY ALL THE POWERS IN THE MULTIVERSE!" he roared, "I WILL HAVE A HAT WORTHY OF MY GLORY." and so he went through his Dark Lore of Doom (tm) looking for something he could make into a hat that would look as stylish on him as a scarecrow does on a treefolk. He thought about the Phyrexians, but they were covered in goopy oil that would make his nonexistant hair greasy. He Tried out angels for a while but they didn't sit quite right. Then, he looked under "e" (because in the Elder Draconic alphabet, "e" for Eldrazi is right next to "h" for Hat) in his Dark Lore of Doom and saw depictions of the Eldrazi, and all their forms. "THIS SHALL BE MY HAT!" he declared, poking a picture of Emrakul, "AND WITH IT I WILL USHER IN A NEW AGE OF DARKNESS -- ER, I MEAN A NEW AGE OF FASHION!" And so Nicol Bolas masterminded the release of the Eldrazi.
57864098 wrote:
Rhox War Monk just flips pancakes, and if games have told us anything, it's that food = life.
56747598 wrote:
76973988 wrote:
This thread has gotten creepy. XP
Really? Really? The last couple days have been roughly every perverse fetish imaginable, but it only got "creepy" when speculation on Mother of Runes's mob affiliation came up?
76672808 wrote:
57864098 wrote:
57531048 wrote:
Nice mana base. Not really.
Yeah, really. If my deck was going to cost $1000+, I'd at least make it good.
99812049 wrote:
I like to think up what I consider clever names for my decks, only later to be laughed at by my wife. It kills me a little on the inside, but thats what marriage is about.
56816728 wrote:
56854588 wrote:
Of course, the best use [of tolaria west] is transmuting for the real Tolaria. ;)
Absolutely. I used to loose to my buddy's Banding deck for ages, it was then that I found out about Tolaria, and I was finally able win my first game.
70246459 wrote:
WOAH wait wait wait
56957928 wrote:
You know, being shallow and jusdgmental aside, "I later found out that Jon infiltrated his way into OKCupid dates with at least two other people"
56957928 wrote:
"I later found out that Jon infiltrated his way into OKCupid dates with at least two other people"
56957928 wrote:
Jon infiltrated his way into OKCupid dates
56957928 wrote:
OH MY GOD
109874309 wrote:
The only way I'd cast this card is into a bonfire.
82032421 wrote:
The short answer is that there's no rule barring annoying people from posting, but there a rule barring us from harassing them about it.
56747598 wrote:
Browbeat is a card that is an appropriate deck choice when there's no better idea available. "No better idea available" was pretty much the running theme of Odyssey era.
56874518 wrote:
Or perhaps it was a more straightforward comment indicating a wish for you to be bitten (Perhaps repeatedly) by a small yet highly venomous arachnid.
70246459 wrote:
58280208 wrote:
You're an idiot, and I'm in no mood for silliness.
57817638 wrote:
57145078 wrote:
You just... Vektor it.
That's the answer to everything.
70246459 wrote:
58347268 wrote:
I think the problem is that you don't exist.
This would sound great out of context!
56965458 wrote:
Modern is like playing a new tournament every time : you build a deck, you win with it, don't bother keeping it. Just build another, its key pieces will get banned.
57864098 wrote:
57309598 wrote:
I specifically remember posting a thread when I was just a witty bitty noob.
You make it sound like that's still not the case.
58325628 wrote:
Rap is what happens when the c from crap is taken away.
Doug Beyer:
But sometimes it's also challenging. Because sometimes OH MY GOD, WHAT THE HELL IS THIS THING?
141434757 wrote:
Flashforward five thousand years (Click for atmosphere) :
57927608 wrote:
to paraphrase Jeff Goldblum, Vektor finds a way.
58347268 wrote:
when in rome **** AND PILLAGE
143229641 wrote:
I always find it helpful when im angry to dress up in an owl costume and rub pennies all over my body in front of a full body mirror next to the window.
Dymecoar:
Playing Magic without Blue is like sleeping without any sheets or blankets. You can do it...but why?
Omega137:
Me: "I love the moment when a control deck stabilizes. It feels so... right." Omega137: "I like the life drop part until you get there, it's the MtG variant of bungee jumping"
Zigeif777:
Just do it like Yu-Gi-Oh or monkeys: throw all the crap you got at them and hope it works or else the by-standers (or opponents) just get dirty and pissed.
57471038 wrote:
58258708 wrote:
It's true that Alpha and Beta didn't contain any cards like Tarmogoyf, Darksteel Colossus, or Platinum Angel. It just contained weak, insignificant cards like Black Lotus, Mox Sapphire, and Time Walk.
Normally it's difficult to pick up on your jokes/sarcasm. But this one's pretty much out there. Good progress. You have moved up to Humanoid. You'll be Human in no time.
91893448 wrote:
94618431 wrote:
I didn't know Samurai were known to be able to cut down whole armies...
They can when they're using lightsabers!
57129358 wrote:
97980259 wrote:
My wife brought home a baby black squirrel they found on a horse track and cared for it for a few days. We named it Grixis, but it died.
Unearth it!
70246459 wrote:
[/spoiler] And I'm on Magic Arcana. How about you? Oh, by the way, I'm also on From the Lab now. Twice, actually. And now with my own submited decklist!
So Wizards removes Vampire Nocturnus and keeps Baneslayer because it's valuable in most decks? It seems that though they reprinted Lightning Bolt and Baneslayer Angel because they were having so much success in standard. Vampire Nocturus is one of if not the best lord in the game. And having all these great vamp cards in the Zendikar block seems that Vampire Nocturus should be guarenteed a spot in 2011.

Wizards, please reconsider, taking away Vampire Nocturnus is an inevitable decline in Vampire decks. If it is not possible, try to print something that gives Vampires +2/+1 and flying in Lights.







Uhh, Vampires are still a new tribe, so they are still being figured out.
I don't think WoTC wants them to be the 'LOLOLOL DROP NOCTURNUS AND WIN' tribe.
They are much better as a controlling tribe, not an aggro one.

And it should be noted that Elves get two lords in M11...just as Soldiers had four in M10.




I don't know what you're talking about, but the are much better as an aggro. I don't understand why they would get rid of Nocturnus. It, along side BSA, encouraged people to buy more packs. This was an incredible mistake made by WotC. They better give us a good 4 mana creature that could replace it...



I didn't mean that the current crop of Vampires make a better control than aggro deck.
I meant that the Vampire tribe seems like it would make more sense as a control tribe.

I mean, Grixis runs Gatekeeper and Nighthawk sometimes.

All of the played Vampires have a control-based utility.
Gatekeeper (kill a creature)
Hexmage (kill a planeswalker, other tricks)
Nighthawk (excellent defense, digs you out of a low life total)
Highborn (pressure to not kill your dudes, insurance)

I don't feel like Nocturnus fits the rest of them. He just wants you to turn them sideways and smash face.
"Stop *****ing, start brewing" -YoMTGTaps Trying to talk Magic players off ledges since 2001. Sharing my knowledge of rumor history, and how to discuss rumors effectively.
I don't regret all the Runeclaw Bear and Essence Scatter "renaming" we did in Magic 2010—each was the correct decision for the game individually.




You're still wrong about this.  Both of those new names are completely generic while the old names were descriptive, had a long history behind them, and had many copies in print that that were no longer standard playable due to the change (actually somewhat relevant with Remove Soul).  Mind Control was the worst offender, going from a flavorful name (Persuasion) to an utterly generic, sci-fi sounding name.

And they're both common cards.. people will gladly give you 4 of them if you ask nicely, or you can buy them at most stores for under a quarter.
Hi Aaron,

Did you ever consider just removing the whole conga line combat damage system, and just having "assign damage and it happens immediately"?

The new deatchtouch template is cleaner, but is still convoluted by having to comply with the conga line. I'd seen the new deatchtouch wording, but its ability to split damage into single points, and its interaction with trample are a bit odd, and are things I wouldn't have realised without seeing the CR or being told. I'm not sure people will read the reminder text for deathtouch, and play it properly.


I have to agree, I don't quite agree with how the "conga line" works with Deathtouch, but it is closer to the intent.

In the old days, when assigning multiple blockers the attacker could do mostly the same thing. The only thing I don't like is that interaction with trample now. Prior to the new ruling even with deathtouch your trample creature had to "use up" all its points on available blockers, and only that carried over. The new "instant lethal" damage will mess with all sorts of card balances, that expect to have some of that trample soaked up as part of the costing. I don't know why they DIDN'T require attackers to assign all their damage first, then the trample... it makes trample + deathtouch way to powerful.

I still think the "conga line" is cleaner than the stack, and cleaner than the "old way" of NO ORDER AT ALL. I also think these new rules mess with things like Banding that was a favorite of white weinie in the day, rules for many pre Visions cards as they were played then are way off now.

"The inclusion of scry in M11 doesn't mean it will be a constant part of Magic going forward. We didn't reevaluate scry as evergreen as much as we reevaluated our rules for how we use keywords. We're happy with how it worked out, and you'll see additional "keyword cameos" in future core sets."

So the inclusion of scry in a CORE set doesn't mean it's CORE.

I sure do love revolving door core sets

So Wizards removes Vampire Nocturnus and keeps Baneslayer because it's valuable in most decks? It seems that though they reprinted Lightning Bolt and Baneslayer Angel because they were having so much success in standard. Vampire Nocturus is one of if not the best lord in the game. And having all these great vamp cards in the Zendikar block seems that Vampire Nocturus should be guarenteed a spot in 2011.

Wizards, please reconsider, taking away Vampire Nocturnus is an inevitable decline in Vampire decks. If it is not possible, try to print something that gives Vampires +2/+1 and flying in Lights.








Uhh, Vampires are still a new tribe, so they are still being figured out.
I don't think WoTC wants them to be the 'LOLOLOL DROP NOCTURNUS AND WIN' tribe.
They are much better as a controlling tribe, not an aggro one.

And it should be noted that Elves get two lords in M11...just as Soldiers had four in M10.





I don't know what you're talking about, but the are much better as an aggro. I don't understand why they would get rid of Nocturnus. It, along side BSA, encouraged people to buy more packs. This was an incredible mistake made by WotC. They better give us a good 4 mana creature that could replace it...




I didn't mean that the current crop of Vampires make a better control than aggro deck.
I meant that the Vampire tribe seems like it would make more sense as a control tribe.

I mean, Grixis runs Gatekeeper and Nighthawk sometimes.

All of the played Vampires have a control-based utility.
Gatekeeper (kill a creature)
Hexmage (kill a planeswalker, other tricks)
Nighthawk (excellent defense, digs you out of a low life total)
Highborn (pressure to not kill your dudes, insurance)

I don't feel like Nocturnus fits the rest of them. He just wants you to turn them sideways and smash face.



I think you've forgotten about bloodghast, vampire lacerator, malakir bloodwitch and all of the vampires who just beat face. As far as the removal of the best vampire lord from the core set, I don't really have a problem with it. They've printed some decent vampires and vampire lords recently so that vampires will live on. Maybe they do want to try vampires out in a controlling role. My personal opinion is that some cards were destined to go and some "favorites" along with it. Like Aaron said in the article "don't take a particular card for granted". Who knows next set it could be baneslayer out nocturnus in.




Hooray, they've finally decided to make deathtouch mean what it always should have done: "Any damage dealt by this creature is lethal".

What puzzles me and my friends is why it was ever any different to this. Having deathtouchers carry around a little pocket of old rules, like Mistform Wall and Master of Arms, seemed like such an odd decision. This new version is the cleanest conceptually it could be, and surely at least one person must have thought of this version during M10 design; I can't see why it wasn't this way from the start.

And to Pegaweb: I'm surprised to still hear people bashing on the conga line. Your "strategy" claim is the most surprising, as it's opened up interesting decisions by removing the automatic best play to stack-and-sac on Sakura-Tribe Elder etc. Bouncing creatures with damage on the stack was fun among experienced players, but always felt somewhat dirty doing it to new players because it's just not what people expect. The new way is better. 







Pegaweb was just saying that if they were going to remove combat damage on the stack that didn't mean they had to remove assigning combat damage. He didn't say "bring back damage on the stack". Anyway, I agree with him. The simplest solution would have been to have creatures assign damage as normal without it using the stack then deathtouch never would have had a problem with the rules.
Don't be too smart to have fun
So can a creature with only trample deal one damage to a blocker and the rest to the defending player?



Only if it has Deathtouch (or if the blocker has Toughness 1).

---

Im really glad they fixed Deathtouch. Its been powered down vs damage prevention/Regeneration, and powered up when combined with Trample, so I think that kinda balances things out. The most important thing is that it is now simpler and cleaner. Very well done (shame it took a year...)

~ Tim
I am Blue/White Reached DCI Rating 1800 on 28/10/11. :D
Sig
56287226 wrote:
190106923 wrote:
Not bad. But what happens flavor wise when one kamahl kills the other one?
Zis iz a sign uf deep psychological troma, buried in zer subconscious mind. By keelink himzelf, Kamahl iz physically expressink hiz feelinks uf self-disgust ova hiz desire for hiz muzzer. [/GermanPsychologistVoice]
56957928 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
That makes no sense to me. If they spelled the ability out on the card in full then it would not be allowed in a mono-black Commander deck, but because they used a keyword to save space it is allowed? ~ Tim
Yup, just like you can have Birds of paradise in a mono green deck but not Noble Hierarch. YAY COLOR IDENTITY
56287226 wrote:
56888618 wrote:
Is algebra really that difficult?
Survey says yes.
56883218 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
You want to make a milky drink. You squeeze a cow.
I love this description. Like the cows are sponges filled with milk. I can see it all Nick Parks claymation-style with the cow's eyes bugging out momentarily as a giant farmer squeezes it like a squeaky dog toy, and milk shoots out of it.
56287226 wrote:
56735468 wrote:
And no judge will ever give you a game loss for playing snow covered lands.
I now have a new goal in life. ;)
Something odd about death-touch and Trample

Say I am attacking with a 4/4 death-touch creature and it's blocked with 5 generic 4/4's.
I can now assign 1 damage to the first four blockers and kill all of them. 

But if I knew the blocking player could prevent 1 damage per creature I  could also assign 2 damage to teh first two and kill those, despite the damage prevention. 

Am I right so far? 

Now if I read the new rules it seems that if the attacking creature had trample I would loose the option of assigning more then minimum lethal damage to some blockers and none to others. 

Is that right?


 
Something odd about death-touch and Trample

Say I am attacking with a 4/4 death-touch creature and it's blocked with 5 generic 4/4's.
I can now assign 1 damage to the first four blockers and kill all of them. 

But if I knew the blocking player could prevent 1 damage per creature I  could also assign 2 damage to teh first two and kill those, despite the damage prevention. 

Am I right so far? 

Now if I read the new rules it seems that if the attacking creature had trample I would loose the option of assigning more then minimum lethal damage to some blockers and none to others. 

Is that right?


 


No, you can choose to divide the rest of the damage among the blocker and the player as you choose
You are Red/Blue!
You are Red/Blue!
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what I create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.
I don't know why Aaron included all of the corner cases in his article, they are merely reminders on how that one simple rule works, not actually rules that you need to read (you can, I usually just prefer applying logic).  By including those, he makes it seem complicated and exploitable...  Lets think about this.  You have to go through the effort to get a large creature, give it trample, and give it deathtouch, and you get ... not card advatage (compared with merely attacking with a large creature), but a couple of extra damage to the face.  Doom Blade.  Use it.
I don't regret all the Runeclaw Bear and Essence Scatter "renaming" we did in Magic 2010—each was the correct decision for the game individually.





You're still wrong about this.  Both of those new names are completely generic while the old names were descriptive, had a long history behind them, and had many copies in print that that were no longer standard playable due to the change (actually somewhat relevant with Remove Soul).  Mind Control was the worst offender, going from a flavorful name (Persuasion) to an utterly generic, sci-fi sounding name.


And they're both common cards.. people will gladly give you 4 of them if you ask nicely, or you can buy them at most stores for under a quarter.




Not the point. It's all about the attitude from WOTC. I can dismiss the issue with misstating the percentage of new cards (from where they counted functional reprints as "new") as simple marketing speak. I've been working in the corporate world long enough to just let that roll off me. But the actual act of renaming such creatures in that way, without even trying to improve them (especially in Grizzly Bear's case) was the real stick in the craw, and whenever they talk about it like this,  they either keep missing the point of our complaints; or they get them but have to present a more diplomatic face. 



"The inclusion of scry in M11 doesn't mean it will be a constant part of Magic going forward. We didn't reevaluate scry as evergreen as much as we reevaluated our rules for how we use keywords. We're happy with how it worked out, and you'll see additional "keyword cameos" in future core sets."

So the inclusion of scry in a CORE set doesn't mean it's CORE.

I sure do love revolving door core sets




You keep using that word "core", I don't think it means what you think it means anymore...

Seriously, they pretty much laid this on the line last year with M10, and they touched on it again in this article. The core set had to evolve. Veteran players wouldn't buy more than a few packs (if that), in favor of buying singles; and then they would tell incoming players to do the same thing. All the old rules of core sets are gone, only vague guidelines (it will be somewhat easier to play than the expansions, any keywords will be on the easier side of things, etc).
Proud member of C.A.R.D. - Campaign Against Rare Duals "...but the time has come when lands just need to be better. Creatures have gotten stronger, spells have always been insane, and lands just sat in this awkward place of necessity." Jacob Van Lunen on the refuge duals, 16 Sep 2009. "While it made thematic sense to separate enemy and allied color fixing in the past, we have come around to the definite conclusion that it is just plain incorrect from a game-play perspective. This is one of these situations where game play should just trump flavor." - Sam Stoddard on ending the separation of allied/enemy dual lands. 05 July 2013
The new combat would only be a "conga line" if the defender chose the order in which they marched towards the enemy. Since the attacker chooses, its more like the aggressor gets to pick their battles (regardless of position on the battlefield), which makes a lot of sense.
I really wish deathtouch creatures just worked like everything else.  I understand that it all makes since when you consider it's 'lethal damage,' but it just seems a little broken, a little overpowered, and too confusing to a new player.

I play magic regularly(every week), but I play with casual people who have a interesting variety of decks.  I'm kinda looked at as the rules guy, and every time I explain deathtouch, in combat, I get looks like, "That's Garbage," (Garbage being a cleaned up version of what's said) and "Why isn't it just the same?"

It might just be the casual game vs. the tournament play game, but I feel a different ruling is needed.
Deathtouch... trample... blah blah blah.  We already know they screwed up combat. Why has no one mentioned the unbelievable awesomeness of Grave Titan's art?  Well, I guess someone just has!  It's unbelievably awesome.
I really wish deathtouch creatures just worked like everything else.  I  understand that it all makes since when you consider it's 'lethal  damage,' but it just seems a little broken, a little overpowered, and too confusing to a new player.

I play magic regularly(every week), but I play with casual people who  have a interesting variety of decks.  I'm kinda looked at as the rules  guy, and every time I explain deathtouch, in combat, I get looks like,  "That's Garbage," (Garbage being a cleaned up version of what's said) and  "Why isn't it just the same?"

It might just be the casual game vs. the tournament play game, but I  feel a different ruling is needed.


Hopefully that will be better now?  The new rule really is simple:  You must assign lethal damage to the first blocker before moving on to the second, etc.  Normally, the damage required to be lethal is equal to a creature's toughness, however, with Deathtouch it takes only a single point.

Nothing too complicated about that.  Deathtouch creatures pack a whallop.  Anyone who's been stung or bitten by a venomous insect knows what it's like - a tiny bit of immediate physical damage (only a pinprick, really) causes a massive amount of pain.

Thanks to everyone who helped with the design of the plane of Golamo in the Great Designer Search 2!
My Decks
These are the decks I have assembled at the moment:
Tournament Decks (4)
Kicker Aggro (Invasion Block) Sunforger/Izzet Guildmage Midrange (Ravnica/Time Spiral/Xth Standard) Dragonstorm Combo (Time Spiral/Lorwyn/Xth Standard) Bant Midrange (Lorwyn/Shards/M10 Standard)
Casual Multiplayer Decks (50)
Angel Resurrection Casual Soul Sisters Sindbad's Adventures with Djinn of Wishes Sphinx-Bone Wand Buyback Morph (No Instants or Sorceries) Cabal Coffers Control Zombie Aggro Hungry, Hungry Greater Gargadon/War Elemental Flashfires/Boil/Ruination - Boom! Call of the Wild Teysa, Orzhov Scion with Twilight Drover, Sun Titan, and Hivestone Slivers Rebels Cairn Wanderer Knights Only Gold and () Spells Captain Sisay Toolbox Spellweaver Helix Combo Merfolk Wizards Izzet Guildmage/The Unspeakable Arcane Combo Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind and his Wizards Creatureless Wild Research/Reins of Power Madness Creatureless Pyromancer Ascension Anarchist Living Death Anvil of Bogardan Madness Shamen with Goblin Game/Wound Reflection Combo Mass damage Quest for Pure Flame Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle/Clear the Land with 40+ Lands Doubling Season Thallids Juniper Order Ranger Graft/Tokens Elf Archer Druids Equilibrium/Aluren Combo Experiment Kraj Combo Reap Combo False Cure/Kavu Predator Combo Savra, Queen of the Golgari Sacrifice/Dredge Elf Warriors Eight-Post Sneak Attack Where Ancients Tread Zur the Enchanter with Opal creatures Tamanoa/Kavu Predator/Collapsing Borders Esper Aggro Mishra, Artificer Prodigy and his Darksteel Reactor Theft and Control Unearth Aggro Soul's Fire Vampires Devour Tokens Phytohydra with Powerstone Minefield Treefolk Friendly? Questing Phelddagrif Slivers Dragon Arch Fun I'm probably forgetting a few...
I'm very exited to see that they made the change to deathtouch that I (and surely others as well) suggested. It makes much more sense this way. Thank you WotC dev team :D
I really wish deathtouch creatures just worked like everything else.  I  understand that it all makes since when you consider it's 'lethal  damage,' but it just seems a little broken, a little overpowered, and too confusing to a new player.

I play magic regularly(every week), but I play with casual people who  have a interesting variety of decks.  I'm kinda looked at as the rules  guy, and every time I explain deathtouch, in combat, I get looks like,  "That's Garbage," (Garbage being a cleaned up version of what's said) and  "Why isn't it just the same?"

It might just be the casual game vs. the tournament play game, but I  feel a different ruling is needed.



Hopefully that will be better now?  The new rule really is simple:  You must assign lethal damage to the first blocker before moving on to the second, etc.  Normally, the damage required to be lethal is equal to a creature's toughness, however, with Deathtouch it takes only a single point.


Nothing too complicated about that.  Deathtouch creatures pack a whallop.  Anyone who's been stung or bitten by a venomous insect knows what it's like - a tiny bit of immediate physical damage (only a pinprick, really) causes a massive amount of pain.




Yeah, it makes perfect sense as long as you know the term deffinitions and interactions.  I just hope you're right, and it makes sense to the newbies.

I still think it's a little overpowered though.  I mean not like, "OMG you have a deathtouch!!11," but I feel like it's a little more then what it should be.  There aren't any really big creatures with deathtouch, but a bunch with trample.  I can see Gorgon Flails becoming more popular in green decks now.
There aren't any really big creatures with deathtouch, but a bunch with trample.


Of course, this just means Scars is all but guarenteed to have an oversized and undercosted deathtouch trample creature in Mythic.

Why are new players always referred to as male? Why can writers not use them or they are neutral terms and must always use him he etc and its never even mixed up. The writing is putting off to a wide audience that might otherwise like the game if it was more friendly towards everyone.
Why can writers not use them or they are neutral terms and must always use him he etc and its never even mixed up.



Because "they", "them", and "their" are all plural pronouns.

A gender-neutral singular personal pronoun does not exist in English, apart from "it", which is used for inanimate objects that cannot have a gender. The syntactical rules of English use the male pronoun when an explicit gender is unknown.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-neutral_pro...
blizzard you pretend to make vampires a tribal option, but you take out the vampire nocturnus for that new lord (and hes not as good as VN), the VN wasnt overpowered or abused, compared to BSAngel all white deck use it

you just put sun light in the new tribe

sure its too late to put the VN in this core set

I was dissapointed with M10 with the combat rules changes and the no reprint of classics core cards (WoG, painlands), now with M11 taking out VN you dissapoint me even more
blizzard you pretend to make vampires a tribal option, but you take out the vampire nocturnus for that new lord (and hes not as good as VN), the VN wasnt overpowered or abused, compared to BSAngel all white deck use it



Yeah, that damn Blizzard. Good thing Wizards of the Coast is coming out with Starcraft 2 in a month.
Sign In to post comments