9/24/2013 Feature: "Theros Update Bulletin"

14 posts / 0 new
Last post
This thread is for discussion of this week's Feature, "Theros Update Bulletin", which goes live Tuesday morning on magicthegathering.com.

Wow, I guess I'm going to have to start frequenting Rules Theory and Templating again and pointing out weird stuff in Oracle, since there's a chance you might actually get to some of it now!

Shame there was no change to the power level errata.

What is this, a forum for ants? Seriously, set it to autofit the screen guys, I shouldn't have over a third of the width of my browser as blank space.

or the use of "the battlefield'

I've seen lot's of text that could have been wirten shorter

If one wants more mechanics and flavor text on cards

Magic has default assumptions that should also be solidfied so they need not be written on every card

NO WAR

DOD replaces human label with terrorist Blood-Chin Fanatic

 

Sesame Street - Somebody Come And play

305.7

This rule, covering effects that change land types, got a small tweak. If an effect sets a land's subtype to one or more of the basic land types, it loses all abilities it had. The rule inadvertently left out abilities it may have had due to copy effects, so that hole was closed.

Can someone give an example for this? 

Soular wrote:

 

305.7

This rule, covering effects that change land types, got a small tweak. If an effect sets a land's subtype to one or more of the basic land types, it loses all abilities it had. The rule inadvertently left out abilities it may have had due to copy effects, so that hole was closed.

Can someone give an example for this? 

If I use Thespian's Stage to copy for example a Mutavault and then my opponent plays a Blood Moon, the way the old rules were written meant that the card would be a Mountain, not have Mutavault's activated ability, but it DID have the Stage's activated ability that it got through "and gains this ability".

With the new rules, it doesn't have either ability anymore.

 

EDIT: eh? Thespian's Stage: http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=366353

Perhaps give Mercurial Chemister (and other relevant cards) a rulings reminder regarding CMC of split cards to go along with X-costs? I've witnessed confusion about this a couple of times.

Also, fix artists for Plateau on Revised and Masters Edition IV when you're messing around with Gatherer.

TobyornotToby: Just write the card names yourself in full rather than copying them from Gatherer.

You can't autocard cards with apostrophes in them

Did anyone else catch that the hoverimage of Talara's Bane has the word "to" that is supposedly missing? Was this word perhaps left out only* in the Oracle text?

 

*cannot stress this word enough.

Rules Advisor from 8-26-09 to 1-31-14, reinstated (reactivated?) on 9-24-14 (been seeing more FNM, prerelease, and release events as of late)
Joined the crowd and got an Avatar from zammm's Avatar Workshop on 5-6-2012

Khans of Tarkir Clan Quiz
After three iterations of taking the quiz, it says each time that I'm Temur, the clan. Which is funny because the dual-color tests still yield the same two results as before.

That "Dual Colors" personality test thing
IMAGE(http://stat.rumandmonkey.com/tests/1/6/5261/20806.jpg)

I am Black/Green

Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!

Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.

I am both selfish and instinctive. I value growth and community, as long as they favour my own objectives; I enjoy nature, and I particularly enjoy watching parts of nature die. At best, I am resilient and tenacious; at worst, I'm uncontrollable and destructive.

Oh, but wait, there were multiple answers that fit my thoughts to some questions. What colors did they say I was?

IMAGE(http://stat.rumandmonkey.com/tests/1/6/5261/20801.jpg)

I am Blue/Green

I am both rational and instinctive. I value self-knowledge and understanding of the world; my ultimate goal is self-improvement and improvement of the world around me. At best, I am focused and methodical; at worst, I am obsessive and amoral.

TobyornotToby wrote:

 

Soular wrote:

 

305.7

This rule, covering effects that change land types, got a small tweak. If an effect sets a land's subtype to one or more of the basic land types, it loses all abilities it had. The rule inadvertently left out abilities it may have had due to copy effects, so that hole was closed.

Can someone give an example for this? 

 

If I use Thespian's Stage to copy for example a Mutavault and then my opponent plays a Blood Moon, the way the old rules were written meant that the card would be a Mountain, not have Mutavault's activated ability, but it DID have the Stage's activated ability that it got through "and gains this ability".

With the new rules, it doesn't have either ability anymore.

 

EDIT: eh? Thespian's Stage: http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=366353

Thanks

OK here is a partial list of issues!  Some of which I have brought up before and they were previously ignored, but since I don't know whether that was because I was wrong or because there was just too much else to do, I'm going to repeat them.  I'll start with the new stuff before getting to my old crankery.   Also I think I'll avoid the weirder stuff or more complicated or less clear stuff for now.

Moonveil Dragon -- Similar cards say "Creatures you control get"; no other card uses the Moonveil Dragon template.  (Light from Within, sort of, but it needs to.)

Urborg Panther, Kyscu Drake, Kookus, Goblin Artisans, Plague Rats, Rohgahh of Kher Keep: All of these cards refer to a "creature named" something or "creatures named" something, when the original card contains no specification that the named permanent has to be a creature.  Should probably be "permanent named" or "permanents" named instead.  (If your Breathstealer is hit by Soul Sculptor, that shouldn't prevent you from sacrificing it.)  Liu Bei, Lord of Shu is a precedent here, FWIW.  So are Sheltered Valley and Tidal Influence, sort of.

Merseine -- This isn't necessarily wrong, it's just weird.  Why does this have an ability that can only be activated by the enchanted creature's controller, rather than just granting an ability to the enchanted creature?  (Maybe some crazy layers thing I'm failing to consider?)

Ante cards -- The rules define the term to "ante" a card, yet the ante cards are inconsistent as to whether or not they use it.  Of the 5 cards that mention adding the top card of someone's library to the ante, only 2 use the term.  (OK I think you already know about this actually but I thought it was worth pointing out anyway just to be certain.)  On that note...

Contract from Below -- The original card text seems to indicate that the first card, the one added to the ante, is in fact drawn first (so things that trigger on drawing a card should trigger).  Should this possibly get Library of Leng or madness-like language, where it's drawn, but it goes into the ante instead of into your hand?

Floral Spuzzem, Delif's Cube -- These cards are old "you may have this creature do something instead of assigning combat damage" cards.  However, these two are different from the rest in terms of their printed text, and I am of the opinion that this should be reflected in their Oracle text.  Floral Spuzzem's ability, e.g., currently says "If you do, Floral Spuzzem assigns no combat damage this turn."  I'm going to suggest it should say "this combat" instead of "this turn".  Why should it destroying an artifact in the first combat of the turn prevent it from assigning combat damage in later combats that turn?  Similarly with Delif's Cube.  Now, all other similar cards say "this turn" in their Oracle text, but this is (presumably) correct, because those cards all say "this turn" on the printed card.  However, these two particular cards -- the Spuzzem and the Cube -- do not say this, so there is no reason to not make them work in a more intuitive manner with multi-combat turns.

Named tokens -- Generally the practice with old cards that made idiosyncratic types of tokens has been to take the old type as the name of the token, like how Tooth and Claw now makes Beast tokens named Carnivore.  However, a number of cards have been ignored in this: Basalt Golem (which has a similar template to Jungle Patrol), Broken Visage, Carrion, Field of Souls (OK this one got reprinted in DD:SvT so quite possibly it should be ignored), Serpent Generator, Snake Basket, Tidal Wave (also similar to Jungle Patrol).

I'm going to leave it at this for now, I think.  Thank you for your time and thank you for all your work getting things to actually work as they're supposed to!

BaconCat wrote:

Shame there was no change to the power level errata.

1. Get Tabak to admit that power level errata exists.

2. Get him to admit that the power level errata should not exist.

3. Get him to admit that it's his job to change it.

Notice that all three steps involve getting Tabak to confront reality. I would recommend growing a beard while you wait, as opposed to holding your breath.

 

...there's been so little discussion, I may as well post some more.

Kill! Destroy! -- This is technically not an Oracle issue, but it really deserves to be pointed out that the official record of this card (going by Gatherer) is lacking the exclamation points in its name.

Al-abara's Carpet -- Another "this turn" vs. "this combat" issue.  Wouldn't "this combat" make more sense?

Creature types -- Yes, sorry to bring up creature types again, but several cards had their creature types screwed up during (if I recall correctly) the Morningtide addendum to the GCTU.  (The GCTU itself avoided these errors, IIRC; not sure what went wrong there.)  These are all cards that were printed originally with a certain creature type, yet the Oracle version lacks that creature type.  For instance, Kjeldoran Skyknight should be a Soldier. The others are Dauthi Horror, Renegade Warlord, Pit Spawn, Mana Leech, Sacred Prey, Leashling, Sylvan Yeti, Marjhan, Shelkin Brownie, and Trained Orgg.  There's also Treacherous Werewolf, but it seems I'm not getting anywhere on that...

Glyph of Doom -- Another turn vs. combat issue.  Currently, if there are two combats, and I cast Glyph of Doom during the second, it will kill all creatures the wall blocked earlier in the turn as well.  Probably this should say "this combat" and have a timing restriction on playing it.

Glyph of Life -- This should possibly also be "this combat".

Brutal Suppression -- OK, this one's maybe a little silly, but the printed text of the original does say "Rebel cards", so perhaps it should apply to Rebel cards not in play as well?  You know, in case you have a Conspiracy out?

Angelic Arbiter, Choose Your Champion, Prahv -- all these cards refer to players attacking with creatures, which is never defined in the rules; according to the rules, creatures attack, they are not attacked with by players.  (Rule 506.3 is quite explicit on this point.)  "Attack" here is serving as a technical game term, not an ordinary English word, so its use really should be defined by the rules.  Probably the simplest solution is to add this to the rules rather than to retemplate these cards.  Meanwhile, let's note the existence of the card Fire and Brimstone, which awkwardly refers to "target player who declared an attacking creature this turn".  If we really are allowing this template, we could use it to clean up Fire and Brimstone.

...and once again I think I'll stop here for now.

The Shanodin Dryads change is a little odd. If someone picks up a 6th or 7th Edition Shanodin Dryads (i.e., one of the two most recent printings of the card), how would they guess that it also has the creature type Nymph?

Sign In to post comments