|
1 year ago ::
Feb 02, 2012 - 6:22PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Jun 24, 2008
|
This thread is for discussion of this week's Latest Developments, which goes live Friday morning on magicthegathering.com.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 02, 2012 - 9:11PM
#2
|
|
|
From this article: "One of the things that was most amazing to me when I arrived in R&D is exactly how much thought goes into what might seem to be basic, run-of-the-mill Limited commons and uncommons. This thread exemplifies that. The cost changed numerous times, the rider flipped back and forth, and VP Bill Rose of all people chimed in on what functioned the entire time as a relatively innocuous, relatively ponderous removal spell. It consistently amazes me what kinds of minutiae my co-workers have managed to pay attention to, and the game is better for it."
This set is getting killed in set reviews as providing nothing anyone actually wants to own. Perhaps you focused too much on the minutiae of treating Magic like a movie where I never get my money back and less on Magic as a box of cards I open because I want to own them. If this isn't blunt enough, this set is terrible. TERRIBLE.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 02, 2012 - 9:20PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Mar 25, 2008
|
Random note: there's a typo in the graphic for Gavony Ironwright. It reads "Gacony Ironwright" instead. Other than having my inner editor get annoyed briefly, I enjoyed it. 
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 02, 2012 - 9:29PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Dec 13, 2009
|
*Looks at Curse of Exhaustion, Clinging Mists, and Drogskol Reaver's notes.*
Wow you guys really hate pure control decks, huh?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 02, 2012 - 9:44PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Apr 16, 2011
|
Meow!
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 02, 2012 - 11:49PM
#6
|
|
|
Looking at the comments for Drogskol Reaver, I'm kind of disappointed that a mythic rare in a set that's supposed to be heavily top-down had nothing but cost-adjustment comments.
Of course, I'm guessing there might be other comments Zac didn't include in the article because they weren't relevant to the point he wanted to make for that particular card, but it still kind of weirds me out.
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
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 03, 2012 - 2:21AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Aug 28, 2008
|
That one doesn't seem quite as top-down as many other things in the set/block. Seems a little "let's make a bad@ss U/W flyer and call it Spirit"
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 03, 2012 - 2:37AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Mar 16, 2004
|
@zammm: I'm not sure. I wouldn't be surprised if that was actually all the comments there were on the giant Reaver.
@The-D: I think that's precisely what happened. It's a mythic rare in the "let's throw together some powerful words" tradition; it's only a Spirit because it happened to be {U}{W}.
@Zac: Out of interest, how many cards in a small set like Dark Ascension have literally 0 Multiverse comments on them?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 03, 2012 - 5:18AM
#9
|
|
|
*Looks at Curse of Exhaustion, Clinging Mists, and Drogskol Reaver's notes.*
Wow you guys really hate pure control decks, huh?
Because the majority of players really hate them too.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 03, 2012 - 5:35AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
May 17, 2009
|
@12three45
Really? Really?!?!
What set reviews are you reading that say that? There are plenty of sweet rares/mythics, and even at lower rarities, you have cards like the awesome Captain/Immerwolf cycle. It may not be the most exciting set ever, but I don't believe you for a second that the community at large is decrying it as terrible. Speak for yourself, but you have a very warped view of popular opinion of Dark Ascension.
|
|
|
~ 
~ 
~ 
~ 
