|
2 years ago ::
Jul 07, 2011 - 1:09PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Jun 24, 2008
|
This thread is for discussion of this month's Update Bulletin, which is live now on magicthegathering.com.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 07, 2011 - 1:27PM
#2
|
|
|
You go, Matt! Get just 100 more Rules Manager points and you can cash them in for a free playset of Chimney Imp  s. (1000 more Rules Manager points and you can cash them in for no Chimney Imp s at all!)
And so people say to me, "How do I know if a word is real?" You know, anyone who's read a children's book knows that love makes things real. If you love a word, use it! That makes it real. Being in the dictionary is an artificial distinction; it doesn't make the word any more real than any other word. If you love a word, it becomes real.
--Erin McKean, Redefining the Dictionary
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 07, 2011 - 4:20PM
#3
|
|
|
I just can't imagine anyone pointing out the flaw in Rally the Horde  without getting smacked upside the head by any other nearby players. Is that why it took 8 years to 'fix'?
"Char you." ~Craig Jones Spoiler:
Show
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 07, 2011 - 4:30PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Jun 16, 2010
|
I'm still not quite clear on the damage assignment. Perhaps additional overly complicated examples are in order?
Example A:
I attack my opponent with a 5/5 Infect creature.
My opponent gang blocks with five 2/2 creatures.
Can I distribute one damage to each of the five creatures (thereby giving them each a -1/-1 counter)?
This is what the rule change is allowing, correct?
Example B:
I attack my opponent with a 5/5 Deathtouch creature.
My opponent gang blocks with five 2/2 creatures.
I can distribute one damage to each creature, because one damage is enough to kill each one.
This was previously allowed and isn't changing, correct?
Example C:
I attack my opponent with a 5/5 Trample creature.
My opponent gang blocks with five 2/2 creatures.
I cannot assign all the damage to a single creature and say the remaining three damage "tramples through". This was not previously allowed nor is it allowed now, correct?
Thanks for any clarification!
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 07, 2011 - 4:41PM
#5
|
|
|
I'm still not quite clear on the damage assignment. Perhaps additional overly complicated examples are in order?
Example A:
I attack my opponent with a 5/5 Infect creature.
My opponent gang blocks with five 2/2 creatures.
Can I distribute one damage to each of the five creatures (thereby giving them each a -1/-1 counter)?
This is what the rule change is allowing, correct?
No. The change that's being made is an extreme corner-case that only affects situations where more than one blocker is blocking more than one attacker, and the sets of what is being blocked overlap.
Example B:
I attack my opponent with a 5/5 Deathtouch creature.
My opponent gang blocks with five 2/2 creatures.
I can distribute one damage to each creature, because one damage is enough to kill each one.
This was previously allowed and isn't changing, correct?
Correct.
Example C:
I attack my opponent with a 5/5 Trample creature.
My opponent gang blocks with five 2/2 creatures.
I cannot assign all the damage to a single creature and say the remaining three damage "tramples through". This was not previously allowed nor is it allowed now, correct?
Correct.
And so people say to me, "How do I know if a word is real?" You know, anyone who's read a children's book knows that love makes things real. If you love a word, use it! That makes it real. Being in the dictionary is an artificial distinction; it doesn't make the word any more real than any other word. If you love a word, it becomes real.
--Erin McKean, Redefining the Dictionary
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 07, 2011 - 6:20PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Jun 20, 2010
|
You probably missed Tember City's subtype because it doesn't exist.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 07, 2011 - 7:57PM
#7
|
|
|
Isn't the change to Serpent Generator  actually a functional change? I don't have convenient access to the previous Oracle wording, but the card as printed clearly states 'If any Poison Snake damages any player' - under the old wording it certainly looks like with Serpent Generator on the field, Mistform Ultimus  (to pick everyone's favorite example, still) would have given a poison counter to any player it dealt damage to, but this isn't true under the new wording... EDIT: D'oh! Got tripped up by the plethora(!) of different wordings on the card. The Chronicles and 5E versions both say 'if any Poison Snake', but the Legends version pretty clearly specifies 'If this creature damages opponent'. (On the other hand, it does say 'opponent' rather than 'any player', which means that the current Oracle wording doesn't actually mimic any of the printed versions of the card.)
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 07, 2011 - 10:41PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Oct 26, 2009
|
When resolving Rally the Horde, don't we end up with an unbounded mandatory loop (that causes a draw) if the player's entire library is exiled and the last card exiled was a non-land, since we have to keep on repeating the process? If so, this could potentially be fixed by changing the wording to "repeat this process until the last card exiled is a land or until no cards are exiled" or something similar.
Also, given the confusion that's come up a number of times on these boards when people read Pyramids, it would be nice if we could add reminder text to it that explains that the land is not destroyed. Something like:
{o2}: Choose one — Destroy target Aura attached to a land; or the next time target land would be destroyed this turn, remove all damage marked on it instead. (The land is not destroyed.)
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 07, 2011 - 11:36PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
May 15, 2010
|
I'll post this here as well as the threads over in RT&T: 800.4a still needs fixing, if your "solution" is what I'm thinking it is. Correct me if I'm wrong, the new process is "all objects owned by that player leave the game, effects which give the player control of any objects or players end, and spells and abilities controlled by that player cease to exist"? That works for Commandeer  , but creates a Bribery  -like situation for Memory Plunder  . With a Plundered spell on the stack, there's non control-changing effect to end, so it will stay where it is... and cease to exist for the next part of the sequence anyway. Maybe we can get this issue solved in time for the "editing and review" process? I'm just going to go ahead and mention that this solution proposed on the T&T thread is probably a better solution than the one you seem to have adopted. (I'm doing so much cross-posting on this issue. It isn't even funny.) Edit: Woe is us, the Plunder issue is doomed for the next rules update. And we can tentatively confirm that Matt lurks RT&T more than this forum.
Rules Nut Advisor
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 08, 2011 - 12:46AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Nov 18, 2003
|
I don't know the hystory of Oracle changes for Pyramids, but it seems like printed functionality is to prevent destruction of any land, while current (and updated) Oracle only prevent destruction of manlands. In other words, why don't Pyramids stop Stone Rain?
|
|
|
~ 
~ 
~ 
~ 
