|
4 years ago ::
Sep 23, 2009 - 8:54AM
#41
|
Date Joined:
Apr 16, 2007
|
I'm aware, but in terms of "flavor" any one of us super-powerful planeswalkers picked this spell up on some world like Lorwyn, saw potential beyond it's original design and are spending a bit of resources to use said potential. Ta-da?
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Sep 23, 2009 - 9:19AM
#42
|
Date Joined:
Oct 18, 2007
|
I'm aware, but in terms of "flavor" any one of us super-powerful planeswalkers picked this spell up on some world like Lorwyn, saw potential beyond it's original design and are spending a bit of resources to use said potential.
Ta-da?
Well, you don't need to convince me. This actually highlights the fundamental problem of using flavor: Different people have different interpretations of what's flavorful. While the game rules and card designs are motivated by flavor, the flavor ultimately needs to be distilled into a set of rigorously defined rules and card templates so that when two people from opposite ends of the planet meet at an international tournament, they can agree on what exactly happens in any given situation.
DCI Level 2 Judge Please use autocard when you ask a question about specific cards: [ c]Serra Angel[ /c] -> Serra Angel 
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Sep 23, 2009 - 12:43PM
#43
|
Date Joined:
Dec 16, 2008
|
Easy answer: When Vedalken Mastermind hit's the battlefield, Terror it. A "trick" like the O-Ring trick, when I first heard how it works, was quite interesting to me. Not because I want to use it, but exactly how it worked. It took a little while, but it's been explained thousands of times. I don't come across this trick much, and if I did, it probably would not even really matter all that much. I can't really agree that WotC "messed up" and then players abused it. It's not even really deserving of the term "abuse".
Orzhova Witness Restarting Quotes Block
Show
Disregard women acquire chase rares.
There are a lot of dudes for whom this is not optional.
How;s a 2 drop 1/2, Flying broken? What am I missing?
You're missing it because *turns Storm Crows sideways* all your base are belong to Chuck Norris and every other overused meme ever.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Sep 23, 2009 - 12:44PM
#44
|
Date Joined:
Sep 22, 2009
|
I don't understand what the big deal is here. You need to have 2 cards with at leaset one of them being an instant ability or an activated ability in order for the combo to work. Is it effective? Yah, sure it is. Is it practical? Not really. These combos have been aroud for a long time. I am sure if it were that big of a deal they would of done something about it by now.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Sep 23, 2009 - 1:48PM
#45
|
Date Joined:
Apr 16, 2009
|
I don't understand what the big deal is here. You need to have 2 cards with at leaset one of them being an instant ability or an activated ability in order for the combo to work. Is it effective? Yah, sure it is. Is it practical? Not really. These combos have been aroud for a long time. I am sure if it were that big of a deal they would of done something about it by now.
If one of the cards is a Boomerang effect, then the net result is that you've used a Boomerang + W to permanently exile a permanent rather than bounce it to its owner's hand. But the power issue isn't that big a deal.. for many people, it's just a flavor issue.. and the fact that the literal english meaning of the rules text is not the correct interpretation, because of how the 2 abilities end up on the stack in reverse order.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Sep 23, 2009 - 7:20PM
#46
|
Date Joined:
Sep 16, 2007
|
[...]Give up this neurotic obsession you have with consistency, and let different abilities actually work different ways.
Give up this neurotic obsession you have with thinking your way of viewing something is the only way and thus it should be fixed to match what you expect, and let different abilities do things other than what you think they should do.
MTG Rules Advisor 
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Sep 24, 2009 - 4:19AM
#47
|
Date Joined:
Feb 26, 2004
|
Triggered abilities don't trigger on "time coordinates." They trigger on events or on a particular game state. "The next time Oblivion Ring is not in play" is neither an event nor a particular game state.
Oblivion Ring not being in play IS a particular game state. And my plan is for the trigger to occur the first time a trigger could occur while said game state is in effect. If this is somehow impossible, can you give an example of a trigger that relates to a game state rather than an event? It sounds to me as though a "game state" is an ongoing condition, so a trigger couldn't ALWAYS be going off as long as it was in effect; it would go off the first time it was in effect, and then would do so again anytime the source of the trigger still existed. If your example is something like "When you control no Vampires, sacrifice Vampire-Lover", then it would be equally legitimate to say "When you do not control this particular permanent named Oblivion Ring, return the permanent to play if it is exiled with this particular Oblivion Ring", only that's too awkward so my wording puts the same concept more concisely by treating the next instance of a particular game state as if it was an event. I don't see how that's an unreasonable leap.
My New Phyrexia Writing CreditsMy M12 Writing CreditsAs far as the benefit of the rest of Magic is concerned, gold cards in Legends were executed perfectly. They got all the excitement a designer could hope out of a splashy new mechanic without using up any of the valuable design space. Truly amazing.
--Aaron Forsythe's Random Card Comment on Kei Takahashi 
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Sep 24, 2009 - 4:23AM
#48
|
Date Joined:
Feb 26, 2004
|
I am sooo sick of this entire thing. For O-Ring and the multiple other cards in the same vein to do something "broken" another resource must also be used, generally requiring it to be done at a later time and with a higher investment resulting in what is, essentially, still a "fair" exchange.
There is no investment when Vedalken Mastermind is involved. It's called Combo and it's part of what makes Magic good, the stuff works together.
Good combos and synergies work within the flavor of the game, like Merfolk Sovereign making merfolk unblockable. I object to combos which treat my epic fantasy battle as if it were a card game with rules that a bunch of math nerds made up. Get your facts out of my fiction!
My New Phyrexia Writing CreditsMy M12 Writing CreditsAs far as the benefit of the rest of Magic is concerned, gold cards in Legends were executed perfectly. They got all the excitement a designer could hope out of a splashy new mechanic without using up any of the valuable design space. Truly amazing.
--Aaron Forsythe's Random Card Comment on Kei Takahashi
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Sep 24, 2009 - 4:36AM
#49
|
|
|
If your example is something like "When you control no Vampires, sacrifice Vampire-Lover", then it would be equally legitimate to say "When you do not control this particular permanent named Oblivion Ring, return the permanent to play if it is exiled with this particular Oblivion Ring", only that's too awkward so my wording puts the same concept more concisely by treating the next instance of a particular game state as if it was an event. I don't see how that's an unreasonable leap.
Will, do you not see the functional change your suggestion here makes?
You've been given a wording that does what you want; the intervening If clause. Your other suggestions run into problems elsewhere. And suggesting that we "allow different abilities to do different things" is something the designers already do. What you want is something different. You want to go back to the days when rulings on what a card did were made based on what the person making the ruling thought the card did, without any consideration for the overall structure of the rules. WotC abandoned that philosophy in the late 1990s, as the game was becoming a mass of ruling contradictions where different people made conflicting rulings on cards that worked in very similar fashion. What you want will result in the game dying before its 20th birthday as it collapses under myriad contradictory rulings.
A firm rules framework is in the long-term best interests of the game. Don't undermine it just because you dislike one side-effect.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Sep 24, 2009 - 4:48AM
#50
|
Date Joined:
Aug 20, 2007
|
I am sooo sick of this entire thing. For O-Ring and the multiple other cards in the same vein to do something "broken" another resource must also be used, generally requiring it to be done at a later time and with a higher investment resulting in what is, essentially, still a "fair" exchange.
There is no investment when Vedalken Mastermind is involved.
Other than the U + Tap for the mastermind's ability then no, no investment is involved. It's called Combo and it's part of what makes Magic good, the stuff works together.
Good combos and synergies work within the flavor of the game, like Merfolk Sovereign making merfolk unblockable. I object to combos which treat my epic fantasy battle as if it were a card game with rules that a bunch of math nerds made up. Get your facts out of my fiction!
Sorry why should your opinion, because that is all this is your opinion, override the rules and then dictate to Wizards how they design any new cards.
As has been said several times on this thread and on the others you have created for this 'issue' if you do not like the rules as they stand you have 2 options: quit playing the game or institute house rules on your gaming group if they agree with you. You say you don't want to be playing a game made up by a bunch of Maths Nerds, hate to say it Richard Garfield IS as you put it a maths nerd.
|
|
|
