|
1 year ago ::
May 06, 2012 - 12:42PM
#31
|
Date Joined:
Nov 23, 2009
|
Human Frailty  was once called Homicide. Why the hell did they change it? At least "Homicide" describes what the spell does, like a good instant or sorcery name should.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 06, 2012 - 12:45PM
#32
|
|
|
It's interesting that Zac admits that he loves to put expensive activated abilities on his card. In the debate with MaRo, did he make a fake creature card with an expensive activated ability and said that people in WotC like to do that, and it was poor design?
No, what he did was put an expensive activated ability you'd never want to activate on a creature and say it was bad design. His point was that giving the player options they'd never use is something to avoid.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 06, 2012 - 9:10PM
#33
|
Date Joined:
Jan 13, 2012
|
Or how I really thought Curse of Oblivion  was costed   for weeks and casted it as such.
Why would you want to cast that card either way?
Spider Spawning  and Burning Vengeance  .
I just feel that Archangel is... Meh... It is too expensive to justify it ever being used in standard. Serra Angel may be 1 less power and toughness but it comes out two turns earlier. I can easily get a 6 cost creature in green/white in turn 3. Heck Sigarda in turn 3 is common... That is a 5/5 flying hex proof and more for less mana. Granted, it is a rare, but this should have been a 5 cost card.
It is supposed to be meh and not be used in Standard, They're cards for Limited.
You can't excuse bad design with, "Well it is for limited." All cards should be good in some way.
Well in Curse of Oblivion 's case, I think it had the right to exist. Innistrad was a graveyard-heavy block and printing a graveyard hoser ala relic of progenitus or nihil spellbomb would be kind of counterproductive.
Quotes
Show
Okay, here is the clincher. I've been waiting to say this.
The "cam girl" this was inspired by was just a girl from a social networking website, Stickam. Her name was TinyTerror and she was just a regular girl who was on her webcam, totally unrelated to any type of adult content.
I hope you all feel really smart now. 
This is like someone coming into class with a bloody nose and everyone's like "Jeez what happened to you" and they're like "I ran into a wall" and everyone laughs at them for being an idiot but then at the end of the class they say "HAHA JUST KIDDING I PUNCHED MYSELF IN THE FACE!!!!!! TALK ABOUT OWNED HAHAHAHAHA"
I really enjoy imagining this from Kevin's perspective. Because in Kevin's world, Rosewater actually reads everything he types. Mark is sitting there right now, reading this, and thinking "The greatest trick the devil ever pulled. . ." Or some such. He chuckles low, then clicks on "The Best Of KEVINSET" and says "Yes, this'll do just fine. A busty lady with banding who deals direct damage to Zones!? Why this will be the star of my next set, and no one will ever believe you Kevin." Then he closes his Macbook, so his servant may move it out of the way, while another servant puts a Fetal Richard Garfield Clone lathered in Steak Sauce in front of him. Then Mark Feasts.
Sorin walked into the chamber where his newly wed bride, Vampy, awaited. A beam of moonlight illuminated his brilliant silver hair as he strode with confidence towards the bed. His shirtless body showcased his powerful abdominal muscles and he was wearing jeans with holes in the knees.
I wish more girls play magic cards...
Have you considered assassinating Kevin?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 07, 2012 - 5:10AM
#34
|
|
|
You can't excuse bad design with, "Well it is for limited." All cards should be good in some way.
Limited is "some way".
In fact, I'm pretty sure more than half of the time Wizards spends on designing sets is spent on Limited, so it isn't just 'some way' it is a very important way.
Also, as a reprint, it's easier to forgive 'bad design'. It invokes nostalgia, and that's why people will like it.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 07, 2012 - 1:44PM
#35
|
Date Joined:
Jun 20, 2011
|
The problem is bad design like that is what destroys standard.
You ever wonder why there are usually only 6 or so decks in any block? Bad design.
Ravnica (the first one) had so many good and playable cards that we saw many different decks at tournaments. Printing crap "limited only" cards encourages net decking and format stagnation. Wizards should try to make as many cards as possible in a set good in constructed. They will still be good in limited but it will keep a more healthy format.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 07, 2012 - 2:04PM
#36
|
|
|
The problem is bad design like that is what destroys standard. You ever wonder why there are usually only 6 or so decks in any block? Bad design. Ravnica (the first one) had so many good and playable cards that we saw many different decks at tournaments. Printing crap "limited only" cards encourages net decking and format stagnation. Wizards should try to make as many cards as possible in a set good in constructed. They will still be good in limited but it will keep a more healthy format.
I have trouble believing this is true. Its not like Ravnica had a super flat power level or even had a much lower percentage of limited filler than other sets. I can't imagine that pushing the power level even more on most cards would reduce the likelihood of there being a few dominant decks in standard. It seems like it increases the likelihood of there being a card they miss.
Besides, they've already ruined limited by turning it into constructed. They don't need to ruin it even more to appease people who are convinced that Ravnica wasn't full of for-limited commons that you wouldn't play in a million years in constructed.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 07, 2012 - 2:12PM
#37
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 07, 2012 - 5:49PM
#38
|
Date Joined:
Jun 20, 2011
|
The problem is bad design like that is what destroys standard. You ever wonder why there are usually only 6 or so decks in any block? Bad design. Ravnica (the first one) had so many good and playable cards that we saw many different decks at tournaments. Printing crap "limited only" cards encourages net decking and format stagnation. Wizards should try to make as many cards as possible in a set good in constructed. They will still be good in limited but it will keep a more healthy format.
I have trouble believing this is true. Its not like Ravnica had a super flat power level or even had a much lower percentage of limited filler than other sets. I can't imagine that pushing the power level even more on most cards would reduce the likelihood of there being a few dominant decks in standard. It seems like it increases the likelihood of there being a card they miss.
Besides, they've already ruined limited by turning it into constructed. They don't need to ruin it even more to appease people who are convinced that Ravnica wasn't full of for-limited commons that you wouldn't play in a million years in constructed.
You accomplish a lot by thinking of the set in a logical manner.
Here is what we know: (in constructed)
1. As far as creatures go anything that is a common and doesn't do something useful isn't worth it.
For example Birds of Paradise is an awesome card, the common version lacks flying and can only produce one color of mana, but if someone is only doing a mono or dual colored deck the elf is a good fill in. It probably wouldn't be the make and break of your deck, Squadron Hawk was great too. Making the "common trash" useful is helpful to the format.
2. If a card is just another card with a slight change that change needs to be cost efficient.
This is the archangel thing. Archangel costs too much. Serra Angel is 2 cost less, but only 1/1 smaller. That accounts for 1 of the 2 cost. They (Wizards) should have given us something to justify that extra cost. First Strike? Trample? Haste? Flash? Hexproof? Yeah a hexproof flying vigilance 5/5 for 6 suddenly becomes VERY good. Not as good as Sigarda but certainly more playable than it is now. Someone at Wizards is just getting lazy.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 08, 2012 - 1:19AM
#39
|
|
|
2. If a card is just another card with a slight change that change needs to be cost efficient. This is the archangel thing. Archangel costs too much. Serra Angel is 2 cost less, but only 1/1 smaller. That accounts for 1 of the 2 cost. They (Wizards) should have given us something to justify that extra cost. First Strike? Trample? Haste? Flash? Hexproof? Yeah a hexproof flying vigilance 5/5 for 6 suddenly becomes VERY good. Not as good as Sigarda but certainly more playable than it is now. Someone at Wizards is just getting lazy.
Azure Drake  versus Amphin Cutthroat  . That is not Wizards getting lazy, that is Wizards understanding how they can keep Limited fresh for years. A LOT of cards could be costed less. That doesn't mean all of them should.
|
|
|
