4/18/2013 TWTW: "So Crazy It Just Might Work"

8 posts / 0 new
Last post
This thread is for discussion of this week's The Week That Was, which goes live Friday morning on magicthegathering.com.

This article reminded me that Hypersonic Dragon exists. You see Wizards, this is what happens when you print absurd creatures.

IMAGE(http://i1.minus.com/jbcBXM4z66fMtK.jpg)

192884403 wrote:
surely one can't say complex conditional passive language is bad grammar ?
This article reminded me that Hypersonic Dragon exists. You see Wizards, this is what happens when you print absurd creatures.



Agree. I am a Spike and I don't like it when some cards are simply so good that they drown the options: either you play the best cards or lose. I wish WotC would put more effort into not making cards like Falkenrath Aristocrat, Geist of Saint Traft or Thragtusk. I actually quite like the designs of those cards, in all honesty, they are interesting in themselves and make for interesting decisions. But they are too good, making deckbuilders have fewer options with respect to what is competitive.

If Thundermaw Hellkite didn't tap those other fliers, if Thragtusk was 4/3 and gained 4 life, if Geist of Saint Traft made a 3/3 token, Falkenrath Aristocrat was 3/2, if Restoration Angel was 3/3 or 2/4, and so forth, they would all still be very, very good cards, certainly playable, but they wouldn't be absurdly powerful, and that would give deckbuilders more options to consider.

My point is that if you bring down the best cards by even the tiniest of notches (all of them), then what you end up with is very, very many more possible tournament-worthy cards, which in turn should increase the diversity all-around, reduce net-decking and give players more of a chance to boil their own deck concoctions, rather than rely on what the community-at-large arrives at through the efforts of thousands to find exactly the best cards: that would happen less when the "best cards" would be more debatable, more equal, more about what you want to do with the deck.

The same can be said at the other end of the spectrum. However much WotC claims that bad cards have their place in Magic, and I agree to the degree that some spectrum of power is welcome, there is no point in printing cards like Primal Visitation, cards that are not playable in any format. I wish every card printed would be playable, even if merely as filler in a limited deck. It is a waste of cardboard to make cards that practically never see play. Like Emmara.

But back on topic: I actually quite like the design of the previewed card, Blast of Genius, the surprisingly many things going on in what amounts to a rather simple text. It's not a Cruel Ultimatum, but it is just on the edge of playability, which is the way I like cards to be: what I consider a well-developed card. It is an option, not an auto-include.

But I wonder: how good would this have been at 5 mana? Would it have been too good? What is your opinion? My gut feeling is that it would still have been fair at 5, but I am not sure.
Awesome Terese Nielsen art =)

The same can be said at the other end of the spectrum. However much WotC claims that bad cards have their place in Magic, and I agree to the degree that some spectrum of power is welcome, there is no point in printing cards like Primal Visitation, cards that are not playable in any format. I wish every card printed would be playable, even if merely as filler in a limited deck. It is a waste of cardboard to make cards that practically never see play. Like Emmara.



According to Wizards according to Magic Online's data, every card sees play, even Primal Visitation
@tobyornottoby Tots agree- Want some more? Here! gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Defaul... Terese Nielsen is fantastic in so many ways. <3 her work. 

Enter the Infinite and Omniscience have a new best friend.


I know it's not normally your thing my friend but how would you like to do 16 to the face?

Edit:  If we venture into silver-bordered land we can do 1,000,000 damage in a single shot. XD

***************************************************************************************

From Mark Rosewater's Tumblr: the0uroboros asked: How in the same set can we have a hexproof, unsacrificable(not a word) creature AND a land that makes it uncounterable. How does this lead to interactive play? I believe I’m able to play my creature and you have to deal with it is much more interactive than you counter my creature.

***************************************************************************************

Post #777

***************************************************************************************

MaRo: One of the classic R&D stories happened during a Scars of Mirrodin draft. Erik Lauer was sitting to my right (meaning that he passed to me in the first and third packs). At the end of the draft, Erik was upset because I was in his colors (black-green). He said, "Didn't you see the signals? I went into black-green in pack one." I replied, "Didn't you see my signals? I started drafting infect six drafts ago."

***************************************************************************************

MaRo: I redesigned him while the effect was on the stack.

I want to make wool blankets out of Nielson's art.


::edit::


The new spate of split cards bode well for the damage output of Blast of Genius. Just look at Turn & Burn as an example. While you might only be planning to pay two or three mana for one half of the card, if you discard it to Blast you get to deal 5 damage for the total converted casting cost of the card.

 


708.5. An effect that asks for a particular characteristic of a split card while it's in a zone other than the stack gets two answers (one for each of the split card's two halves).

Example: Infernal Genesis has an ability that reads, "At the beginning of each player's upkeep, that player puts the top card from his or her library into his or her graveyard. He or she then puts X 1/1 black Minion creature tokens onto the battlefield, where X is that card's converted mana cost." If the top card of your library is Assault/Battery when this ability resolves, the game sees its converted mana cost as "1, and 4." You get five creature tokens.

708.6. Some effects perform comparisons involving characteristics of one or more split cards in a zone other than the stack.

708.6a An effect that performs a positive comparison (such as asking if a card is red) or a relative comparison (such as asking if a card's converted mana cost is less than 2) involving characteristics of one or more split cards in any zone other than the stack gets only one answer. This answer is "yes" if either side of each split card in the comparison would return a "yes" answer if compared individually.

Example: Void reads, "Choose a number. Destroy all artifacts and creatures with converted mana cost equal to that number. Then target player reveals his or her hand and discards all nonland cards with converted mana cost equal to the number." If a player casts Void and chooses 1, his or her opponent would discard Assault/Battery because the game sees its converted mana cost as "1, and 4." The same is true if the player chooses 4. If the player chooses 5, however, Assault/Battery would be unaffected.

 
All it is is nonsense to my ears.
Sign In to post comments