5/9/2014 - Feature: Journey into Nyx Update Bulletin

8 posts / 0 new
Last post

This thread is for discussion of this week's Feature, "Journey into Nyx Update Bulletin", which goes live Friday morning on magicthegathering.com.

"So Reconnaissance had (roughly) the same words it always did, but it was a vastly different card. That seemed very wrong to me. We came up with a wording that restored its original functionality."

 

Will Master of Arms be restored to its original functionality?

Given that the end result of rules changes has been to add secret text to Reconnaissance, but the end result of rules changes has been to remove secret text from Master at Arms, probably not.

"Proc" stands for "Programmed Random OCcurance". It does not even vaguely apply to anything Magic cards do. Don't use it.

Level 1 Judge as of 09/26/2013

Zammm = Batman

"Ability words are flavor text for Melvins." -- Fallingman

Hey, they finally posted a thread for this article. I sent an e-mail with various arguments defending a careful consideration of retracting your change to Reconnaissance but you did not respond. Seeing as they the old "complainers and invested people post" line might get used to disregard my complaints about the change I aks this: who cares about the change besides old time players who are invested. Furthermore, as I questioned when I contacted you, are you really trying to get people that play casually with cards as old as Reconnaissance to play the game correctly. With all of the errata, changed creature types, rule changes, and interactions across the years I believe that is unecessarily lofty goal. For those few of us that play Reconnaissance, let us continue the joy of doing something relatively powerful with an old uncommon. 

tamrian wrote:

Hey, they finally posted a thread for this article. I sent an e-mail with various arguments defending a careful consideration of retracting your change to Reconnaissance but you did not respond. Seeing as they the old "complainers and invested people post" line might get used to disregard my complaints about the change I aks this: who cares about the change besides old time players who are invested. Furthermore, as I questioned when I contacted you, are you really trying to get people that play casually with cards as old as Reconnaissance to play the game correctly. With all of the errata, changed creature types, rule changes, and interactions across the years I believe that is unecessarily lofty goal. For those few of us that play Reconnaissance, let us continue the joy of doing something relatively powerful with an old uncommon. 

 

From what I can gather, Tabak actually thinks sporadically altering the functionality of old cards that are almost exclusively played by people who are familiar with their functionality is a helpful improvement.

 

He also thinks that most people share his opinion. By which I mean, when he leaves the battlefield, someone is going to lose 20 life. ;)

I'm not sure how much play it got, but if anyone was playing it today, it almost certainly wasn't because of its original design intent.

 

That's not entirely correct, at least in my case. The way I usually play it is to just send all of my creatures into combat just to see how the attacked player responds. If the response is favorable, great! I'll continue (completely or partially) with the attack (generally for minor damage), then untap my creatures again so I can block (that part was not the original design intent, but an important part). If I dislike the player's response to my attack, I just blow off the attack. This style of playing makes it very fun in casual, and its effect is unique.

 

So how much does the change affect this? It might sound like what I described is perfectly doable even with the new wording, but the truth is that it throws a wrench in the entire plan. The point of sending out the scouts is that in the relatively rare case you find a hole in their defenses, you can actually strike at it. Under the new rules, it's very nice that he decided not to block your 1/1 deathtouch, but you'll still have to recall it because you need it to block. Having almost all of the usual risk of attacking (because let's face it, >95% of the time combat is predictable and there's no difference between sending out all of the creatures and recalling most of them and just sending out the useful creatures) renders the 'scouting' aspect useless, and Reconnaisance is no longer worth a card slot even in casual decks as it is now; if you really want to manipulate combat, there are far better tricks for that nowadays (ranging from straight-out manipulating combat using [autocard]Master Warcraft[/card] to using control-shifting effects to get creatures out of combat to flickering to just killing the blocking creature and/or regenerating yours), much more common than in the day Reconnaisance was printed.

 

Reconnaisance was a fun niche card that was barely played as it is now. With the new wording, it's no longer worth playing even in casual because it simply doesn't do anything useful anymore in modern-day Magic. But what I find worse is that there's nothing to replace it; there is not a single card I can use to prod the opponent's defenses like I could do with Reconnaisance. If we get a new card that does what Reconnaisance did, even at a higher mana cost (I'd even play it if it cost 3W), I could accept it. But a unique card was lost in this change to make place for a worse version of an effect we already have on plenty of other cards.

"The rules say when you search your library for a card, you don't have to find it, even if it's there. On cards that let you search for multiple cards, we now include a helpful "up to" to help people who may not know that rule."

 

Does it mean, that it is possible to find only one card with Intuition? If not then could it be please alittle explained? I do not see why it could not find just one card especially when looking at Matt Tabak comment of nonfunctional rule change of Scapeshift.

Tabak's explanation was cut short somehow. He meant to say "...when you search your library for a card of a specified kind​." For Intuition (and Diabolic Tutor and other things that only say "card"), if your library has cards in it, you have to find them.

"Proc" stands for "Programmed Random OCcurance". It does not even vaguely apply to anything Magic cards do. Don't use it.

Level 1 Judge as of 09/26/2013

Zammm = Batman

"Ability words are flavor text for Melvins." -- Fallingman

Sign In to post comments